Abstract

Docking molecules into their respective 3D macromolecular targets is a widely used method for lead optimization. However, the best known docking algorithms often fail to position the ligand in an orientation close to the experimental binding mode. It was reported recently that consensus scoring enhances the hit rates in a virtual screening experiment. This methodology focused on the top-ranked pose, with the underlying assumption that the orientation/conformation of the docked compound is the most accurate. In an effort to eliminate the scoring function bias, and assess the ability of the docking algorithms to provide solutions similar to the crystallographic modes, we investigated the most known docking programs and evaluated all of the resultant poses. We present the results of an extensive computational study in which five docking programs (FlexX, DOCK, GOLD, LigandFit, Glide) were investigated against 14 protein families (69 targets). Our findings show that some algorithms perform consistently better than others, and a correspondence between the nature of the active site and the best docking algorithm can be found.

Keywords

Docking (animal)DOCKProtein–ligand dockingSearching the conformational space for dockingVirtual screeningAlgorithmChemistryComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceProtein structureDrug discoveryBiochemistry

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
2003
Type
article
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
558-565
Citations
584
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

584
OpenAlex

Cite This

Maria Kontoyianni, Laura M. McClellan, Glenn S. Sokol (2003). Evaluation of Docking Performance:  Comparative Data on Docking Algorithms. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry , 47 (3) , 558-565. https://doi.org/10.1021/jm0302997

Identifiers

DOI
10.1021/jm0302997