Virtual Screening for SARS-CoV Protease Based on KZ7088 Pharmacophore Points
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pharmacophore modeling can provide valuable insight into ligand-receptor interactions. It can also be used in 3D (dimensional) database searching for potentially finding biologically active compounds and providing new research ideas and directions for drug-discovery projects. To stimulate the structure-based drug design against SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome), a pharmacophore search was conducted over 3.6 millions of compounds based on the atomic coordinates of the complex obtained by docking KZ7088 (a derivative of AG7088) to SARS CoV M(pro) (coronavirus main proteinase), as reportedly recently (Chou, K. C.; Wei, D. Q.; Zhong, W. Z. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2003, 308, 148-151). It has been found that, of the 3.6 millions of compounds screened, 0.07% are with the score satisfying five of the six pharmacophore points. Moreover, each of the hit compounds has been evaluated for druggability according to 13 metrics based on physical, chemical, and structural properties. Of the 0.07% compounds thus retrieved, 17% have a perfect score of 1.0; while 23% with one druggable rule violation, 13% two violations, and 47% more than two violations. If the criterion for druggability is set at a maximum allowance of two rule violations, we obtain that only about 0.03% of the compounds screened are worthy of further tests by experiments. These findings will significantly narrow down the search scope for potential compounds, saving substantial time and money. Finally, the featured templates derived from the current study will also be very useful for guiding the design and synthesis of effective drugs for SARS therapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".