↓ Skip to main content

Application of a simple quantum chemical approach to ligand fragment scoring for Trypanosoma brucei pteridine reductase 1 inhibition

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Application of a simple quantum chemical approach to ligand fragment scoring for Trypanosoma brucei pteridine reductase 1 inhibition
Published in
Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10822-017-0035-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wiktoria Jedwabny, Joanna Panecka-Hofman, Edyta Dyguda-Kazimierowicz, Rebecca C. Wade, W. Andrzej Sokalski

Abstract

There is a need for improved and generally applicable scoring functions for fragment-based approaches to ligand design. Here, we evaluate the performance of a computationally efficient model for inhibitory activity estimation, which is composed only of multipole electrostatic energy and dispersion energy terms that approximate long-range ab initio quantum mechanical interaction energies. We find that computed energies correlate well with inhibitory activity for a compound series with varying substituents targeting two subpockets of the binding site of Trypanosoma brucei pteridine reductase 1. For one subpocket, we find that the model is more predictive for inhibitory activity than the ab initio interaction energy calculated at the MP2 level. Furthermore, the model is found to outperform a commonly used empirical scoring method. Finally, we show that the results for the two subpockets can be combined, which suggests that this simple nonempirical scoring function could be applied in fragment-based drug design.

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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 24%
Student > Master 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Other 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 29%
Chemistry 4 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 15 March 2021.
All research outputs
#4,741,859
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#212
of 949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,297
of 325,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
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 325,649 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them