↓ Skip to main content

Improving Docking Performance Using Negative Image-Based Rescoring

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Improving Docking Performance Using Negative Image-Based Rescoring
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2018.00260
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sami T. Kurkinen, Sanna Niinivehmas, Mira Ahinko, Sakari Lätti, Olli T. Pentikäinen, Pekka A. Postila

Abstract

Despite the large computational costs of molecular docking, the default scoring functions are often unable to recognize the active hits from the inactive molecules in large-scale virtual screening experiments. Thus, even though a correct binding pose might be sampled during the docking, the active compound or its biologically relevant pose is not necessarily given high enough score to arouse the attention. Various rescoring and post-processing approaches have emerged for improving the docking performance. Here, it is shown that the very early enrichment (number of actives scored higher than 1% of the highest ranked decoys) can be improved on average 2.5-fold or even 8.7-fold by comparing the docking-based ligand conformers directly against the target protein's cavity shape and electrostatics. The similarity comparison of the conformers is performed without geometry optimization against the negative image of the target protein's ligand-binding cavity using the negative image-based (NIB) screening protocol. The viability of the NIB rescoring or the R-NiB, pioneered in this study, was tested with 11 target proteins using benchmark libraries. By focusing on the shape/electrostatics complementarity of the ligand-receptor association, the R-NiB is able to improve the early enrichment of docking essentially without adding to the computing cost. By implementing consensus scoring, in which the R-NiB and the original docking scoring are weighted for optimal outcome, the early enrichment is improved to a level that facilitates effective drug discovery. Moreover, the use of equal weight from the original docking scoring and the R-NiB scoring improves the yield in most cases.

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 14 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 25%
Chemistry 9 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Computer Science 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 17 28%
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 08 March 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#7,726
of 19,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,923
of 345,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#155
of 373 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 19,724 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 345,388 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 373 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.