Machine learning-based scoring functions (MLSFs) have attracted extensive attention recently and are expected to be potential rescoring tools for structure-based virtual screening (SBVS). However, a major concern nowadays is whether MLSFs trained for generic uses rather than a given target can consistently be applicable for VS. In this study, a systematic assessment was carried out to re-evaluate the effectiveness of 14 reported MLSFs in VS. Overall, most of these MLSFs could hardly achieve satisfactory results for any dataset, and they could even not outperform the baseline of classical SFs such as Glide SP. An exception was observed for RFscore-VS trained on the Directory of Useful Decoys-Enhanced dataset, which showed its superiority for most targets. However, in most cases, it clearly illustrated rather limited performance on the targets that were dissimilar to the proteins in the corresponding training sets. We also used the top three docking poses rather than the top one for rescoring and retrained the models with the updated versions of the training set, but only minor improvements were observed. Taken together, generic MLSFs may have poor generalization capabilities to be applicable for the real VS campaigns. Therefore, it should be quite cautious to use this type of methods for VS.
How to accurately estimate protein–ligand binding affinity remains a key challenge in computer-aided drug design (CADD). In many cases, it has been shown that the binding affinities predicted by classical scoring functions (SFs) cannot correlate well with experimentally measured biological activities. In the past few years, machine learning (ML)-based SFs have gradually emerged as potential alternatives and outperformed classical SFs in a series of studies. In this study, to better recognize the potential of classical SFs, we have conducted a comparative assessment of 25 commonly used SFs. Accordingly, the scoring power was systematically estimated by using the state-of-the-art ML methods that replaced the original multiple linear regression method to refit individual energy terms. The results show that the newly-developed ML-based SFs consistently performed better than classical ones. In particular, gradient boosting decision tree (GBDT) and random forest (RF) achieved the best predictions in most cases. The newly-developed ML-based SFs were also tested on another benchmark modified from PDBbind v2007, and the impacts of structural and sequence similarities were evaluated. The results indicated that the superiority of the ML-based SFs could be fully guaranteed when sufficient similar targets were contained in the training set. Moreover, the effect of the combinations of features from multiple SFs was explored, and the results indicated that combining NNscore2.0 with one to four other classical SFs could yield the best scoring power. However, it was not applicable to derive a generic target-specific SF or SF combination.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.