The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The maximal affinity of ligands
Open accessAbstract
We explore the question of what are the best ligands for macromolecular targets. A survey of experimental data on a large number of the strongest-binding ligands indicates that the free energy of binding increases with the number of nonhydrogen atoms with an initial slope of ≈−1.5 kcal/mol (1 cal = 4.18 J) per atom. For ligands that contain more than 15 nonhydrogen atoms, the free energy of binding increases very little with relative molecular mass. This nonlinearity is largely ascribed to nonthermodynamic factors. An analysis of the dominant interactions suggests that van der Waals interactions and hydrophobic effects provide a reasonable basis for understanding binding affinities across the entire set of ligands. Interesting outliers that bind unusually strongly on a per atom basis include metal ions, covalently attached ligands, and a few well known complexes such as biotin–avidin.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lipinski, C. A., Lombardo, F., Dominy, B. W., & Feeney, P. J. (2001) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0169-409x(00)00129-0 · Cited by 18,139
Can We Learn To Distinguish between “Drug-like” and “Nondrug-like” Molecules?
Ajay, Walters, W. P., & Murcko, M. A. (1998) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm970666c · Cited by 484
Cited by
Directory of useful decoys, enhanced (DUD-E): better ligands and decoys for better benchmarking.
Mysinger, M. M., Carchia, M., Irwin, J. J., & Shoichet, B. K. (2012) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm300687e · Cited by 2,412
The resurgence of covalent drugs
Singh, J., Petter, R. C., Baillie, T. A., & Whitty, A. (2011) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd3410 · Cited by 1,873
Benchmarking sets for molecular docking.
Huang, N., Shoichet, B. K., & Irwin, J. J. (2006) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm0608356 · Cited by 1,318
Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions
Halperin, I., Ma, B., Wolfson, H., & Nussinov, R. (2002) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.10115 · Cited by 1,294
The role of ligand efficiency metrics in drug discovery
Hopkins, A. L., Keserü, G. M., Leeson, P. D., Rees, D. C., & Reynolds, C. H. (2014) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd4163 · Cited by 1,181
Metadata
- Authors
- Kuntz, I. D., Chen, K., Sharp, K. A., & Kollman, P. A.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1999-08-31
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 18
- Pages
- 9997-10002
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2127073449
- Cited by
- 849
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The maximal affinity of ligands. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.96.18.9997
- The paper
- Kuntz, I. D., Chen, K., Sharp, K. A., & Kollman, P. A. (1999). The maximal affinity of ligands. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.18.9997
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.