↓ Skip to main content

Ligand-based virtual screening under partial shape constraints

Overview of attention for article published in Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Ligand-based virtual screening under partial shape constraints
Published in
Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10822-017-0011-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mathias M. von Behren, Matthias Rarey

Abstract

Ligand-based virtual screening has proven to be a viable technology during the search for new lead structures in drug discovery. Despite the rapidly increasing number of published methods, meaningful shape matching as well as ligand and target flexibility still remain open challenges. In this work, we analyze the influence of knowledge-based sterical constraints on the performance of the recently published ligand-based virtual screening method mRAISE. We introduce the concept of partial shape matching enabling a more differentiated view on chemical structure. The new method is integrated into the LBVS tool mRAISE providing multiple options for such constraints. The applied constraints can either be derived automatically from a protein-ligand complex structure or by manual selection of ligand atoms. In this way, the descriptor directly encodes the fit of a ligand into the binding site. Furthermore, the conservation of close contacts between the binding site surface and the query ligand can be enforced. We validated our new method on the DUD and DUD-E datasets. Although the statistical performance remains on the same level, detailed analysis reveal that for certain and especially very flexible targets a significant improvement can be achieved. This is further highlighted looking at the quality of calculated molecular alignments using the recently introduced mRAISE dataset. The new partial shape constraints improved the overall quality of molecular alignments especially for difficult targets with highly flexible or different sized molecules. The software tool mRAISE is freely available on Linux operating systems for evaluation purposes and academic use (see http://www.zbh.uni-hamburg.de/raise ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 30%
Researcher 9 30%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Professor 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 8 27%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 20%
Chemistry 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 4 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 March 2017.
All research outputs
#17,350,971
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#736
of 949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,556
of 337,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,652 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.