↓ Skip to main content

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

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Machine-learning scoring functions for identifying native poses of ligands docked to known and novel proteins
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-16-s6-s3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hossam M Ashtawy, Nihar R Mahapatra

Abstract

Molecular docking is a widely-employed method in structure-based drug design. An essential component of molecular docking programs is a scoring function (SF) that can be used to identify the most stable binding pose of a ligand, when bound to a receptor protein, from among a large set of candidate poses. Despite intense efforts in developing conventional SFs, which are either force-field based, knowledge-based, or empirical, their limited docking power (or ability to successfully identify the correct pose) has been a major impediment to cost-effective drug discovery. Therefore, in this work, we explore a range of novel SFs employing different machine-learning (ML) approaches in conjunction with physicochemical and geometrical features characterizing protein-ligand complexes to predict the native or near-native pose of a ligand docked to a receptor protein's binding site. We assess the docking accuracies of these new ML SFs as well as those of conventional SFs in the context of the 2007 PDBbind benchmark dataset on both diverse and homogeneous (protein-family-specific) test sets. Further, we perform a systematic analysis of the performance of the proposed SFs in identifying native poses of ligands that are docked to novel protein targets. We find that the best performing ML SF has a success rate of 80% in identifying poses that are within 1 Å root-mean-square deviation from the native poses of 65 different protein families. This is in comparison to a success rate of only 70% achieved by the best conventional SF, ASP, employed in the commercial docking software GOLD. In addition, the proposed ML SFs perform better on novel proteins that they were never trained on before. We also observed steady gains in the performance of these scoring functions as the training set size and number of features were increased by considering more protein-ligand complexes and/or more computationally-generated poses for each complex.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 22%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Researcher 7 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 8%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 18 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 12%
Computer Science 9 12%
Chemistry 7 9%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 20 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 April 2015.
All research outputs
#14,222,419
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#4,721
of 7,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,352
of 264,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#98
of 144 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 264,852 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 144 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.