2021
DOI: 10.1186/s13321-021-00516-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of structure- and ligand-based scoring functions for deep generative models: a GPCR case study

Abstract: Deep generative models have shown the ability to devise both valid and novel chemistry, which could significantly accelerate the identification of bioactive compounds. Many current models, however, use molecular descriptors or ligand-based predictive methods to guide molecule generation towards a desirable property space. This restricts their application to relatively data-rich targets, neglecting those where little data is available to sufficiently train a predictor. Moreover, ligand-based approaches often bi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
65
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(74 citation statements)
references
References 97 publications
0
65
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More recently, molecular docking has been incorporated into RL generative model paradigms, offering a proposed solution that integrates structural information, steering molecular design by rewarding compounds that exhibit good docking scores and circumventing some limitations of QSAR models. [ 18 21 ] However, it is often challenging to ascertain what exactly constitutes a ‘good’ docking score. Docking algorithms are inherently sensitive to the three-dimensional (3D) representation of the protein and ligands [ 22 , 23 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recently, molecular docking has been incorporated into RL generative model paradigms, offering a proposed solution that integrates structural information, steering molecular design by rewarding compounds that exhibit good docking scores and circumventing some limitations of QSAR models. [ 18 21 ] However, it is often challenging to ascertain what exactly constitutes a ‘good’ docking score. Docking algorithms are inherently sensitive to the three-dimensional (3D) representation of the protein and ligands [ 22 , 23 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recently, molecular docking has been incorporated into RL generative model paradigms, offering a proposed solution that integrates structural information, steering molecular design by rewarding compounds that exhibit good docking scores and circumventing some limitations of QSAR models. [18][19][20][21] However, it is often challenging to ascertain what exactly constitutes a 'good' docking score. Docking algorithms are inherently sensitive to the three-dimensional (3D) representation of the protein and ligands [22,23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have selected the dopamine receptor D2 (DRD2) as the biological target of interest. This is a commonly used target in molecular generative models studies by our 30,35,36,25 and other groups 24,37,38 in this field and allows access to large publicly available SAR datasets.…”
Section: Library Scaffoldmentioning
confidence: 99%