Literature DB >> 27592011

A D3R prospective evaluation of machine learning for protein-ligand scoring.

Jocelyn Sunseri1, Matthew Ragoza1, Jasmine Collins1, David Ryan Koes2.   

Abstract

We assess the performance of several machine learning-based scoring methods at protein-ligand pose prediction, virtual screening, and binding affinity prediction. The methods and the manner in which they were trained make them sufficiently diverse to evaluate the utility of various strategies for training set curation and binding pose generation, but they share a novel approach to classification in the context of protein-ligand scoring. Rather than explicitly using structural data such as affinity values or information extracted from crystal binding poses for training, we instead exploit the abundance of data available from high-throughput screening to approach the problem as one of discriminating binders from non-binders. We evaluate the performance of our various scoring methods in the 2015 D3R Grand Challenge and find that although the merits of some features of our approach remain inconclusive, our scoring methods performed comparably to a state-of-the-art scoring function that was fit to binding affinity data.

Entities:  

Keywords:  D3R; Machine learning; Protein-ligand scoring; Virtual screening

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27592011      PMCID: PMC5079830          DOI: 10.1007/s10822-016-9960-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des        ISSN: 0920-654X            Impact factor:   3.686


  52 in total

1.  Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 1. Method and assessment of docking accuracy.

Authors:  Richard A Friesner; Jay L Banks; Robert B Murphy; Thomas A Halgren; Jasna J Klicic; Daniel T Mainz; Matthew P Repasky; Eric H Knoll; Mee Shelley; Jason K Perry; David E Shaw; Perry Francis; Peter S Shenkin
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2004-03-25       Impact factor: 7.446

2.  Scoring and lessons learned with the CSAR benchmark using an improved iterative knowledge-based scoring function.

Authors:  Sheng-You Huang; Xiaoqin Zou
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-08-31       Impact factor: 4.956

3.  Virtual screening of molecular databases using a support vector machine.

Authors:  Robert N Jorissen; Michael K Gilson
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2005 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.956

4.  General and targeted statistical potentials for protein-ligand interactions.

Authors:  Wijnand T M Mooij; Marcel L Verdonk
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2005-11-01

5.  Comparative assessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set.

Authors:  Tiejun Cheng; Xun Li; Yan Li; Zhihai Liu; Renxiao Wang
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 4.956

6.  Empirical scoring functions: I. The development of a fast empirical scoring function to estimate the binding affinity of ligands in receptor complexes.

Authors:  M D Eldridge; C W Murray; T R Auton; G V Paolini; R P Mee
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 3.686

7.  Machine-learning techniques applied to antibacterial drug discovery.

Authors:  Jacob D Durrant; Rommie E Amaro
Journal:  Chem Biol Drug Des       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.817

8.  CSAR benchmark exercise of 2010: combined evaluation across all submitted scoring functions.

Authors:  Richard D Smith; James B Dunbar; Peter Man-Un Ung; Emilio X Esposito; Chao-Yie Yang; Shaomeng Wang; Heather A Carlson
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-08-29       Impact factor: 4.956

9.  NNScore 2.0: a neural-network receptor-ligand scoring function.

Authors:  Jacob D Durrant; J Andrew McCammon
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-11-03       Impact factor: 4.956

10.  Machine-learning scoring functions for identifying native poses of ligands docked to known and novel proteins.

Authors:  Hossam M Ashtawy; Nihar R Mahapatra
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  10 in total

1.  Improved pose and affinity predictions using different protocols tailored on the basis of data availability.

Authors:  Philip Prathipati; Chioko Nagao; Shandar Ahmad; Kenji Mizuguchi
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Docking of small molecules to farnesoid X receptors using AutoDock Vina with the Convex-PL potential: lessons learned from D3R Grand Challenge 2.

Authors:  Maria Kadukova; Sergei Grudinin
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2017-09-14       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Incorporating Explicit Water Molecules and Ligand Conformation Stability in Machine-Learning Scoring Functions.

Authors:  Jianing Lu; Xuben Hou; Cheng Wang; Yingkai Zhang
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 4.956

Review 4.  Improving small molecule virtual screening strategies for the next generation of therapeutics.

Authors:  Bentley M Wingert; Carlos J Camacho
Journal:  Curr Opin Chem Biol       Date:  2018-06-17       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 5.  Delta Machine Learning to Improve Scoring-Ranking-Screening Performances of Protein-Ligand Scoring Functions.

Authors:  Chao Yang; Yingkai Zhang
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 6.162

6.  Rama: a machine learning approach for ribosomal protein prediction in plants.

Authors:  Thales Francisco Mota Carvalho; José Cleydson F Silva; Iara Pinheiro Calil; Elizabeth Pacheco Batista Fontes; Fabio Ribeiro Cerqueira
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-24       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Geminivirus data warehouse: a database enriched with machine learning approaches.

Authors:  Jose Cleydson F Silva; Thales F M Carvalho; Marcos F Basso; Michihito Deguchi; Welison A Pereira; Roberto R Sobrinho; Pedro M P Vidigal; Otávio J B Brustolini; Fabyano F Silva; Maximiller Dal-Bianco; Renildes L F Fontes; Anésia A Santos; Francisco Murilo Zerbini; Fabio R Cerqueira; Elizabeth P B Fontes
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2017-05-05       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Performance of machine-learning scoring functions in structure-based virtual screening.

Authors:  Maciej Wójcikowski; Pedro J Ballester; Pawel Siedlecki
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Prediction of various freshness indicators in fish fillets by one multispectral imaging system.

Authors:  Sara Khoshnoudi-Nia; Marzieh Moosavi-Nasab
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Virtual Screening with Gnina 1.0.

Authors:  Jocelyn Sunseri; David Ryan Koes
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2021-12-04       Impact factor: 4.411

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.