MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086787941 · doi:10.1002/prot.21479

Evaluation of docking programs for predicting binding of Golgi α‐mannosidase II inhibitors: A comparison with crystallography

2007· article· en· W2086787941 on OpenAlexafffund
Pablo Englebienne, Hélène Fiaux, D.A. Kuntz, Christopher R. Corbeil, Sandrine Gerber‐Lemaire, David R. Rose, Nicolas Moitessier

Bibliographic record

VenueProteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCarbohydrate Chemistry and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDocking (animal)AutoDockChemistryActive siteHydrolaseDOCKGolgi apparatusStereochemistryBinding siteComputational biologyCrystallographyEnzymeBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Golgi alpha-mannosidase II (GMII), a zinc-dependent glycosyl hydrolase, is a promising target for drug development in anti-tumor therapies. Using X-ray crystallography, we have determined the structure of Drosophila melanogaster GMII (dGMII) complexed with three different inhibitors exhibiting IC50's ranging from 80 to 1000 microM. These structures, along with those of seven other available dGMII/inhibitor complexes, were then used as a basis for the evaluation of seven docking programs (GOLD, Glide, FlexX, AutoDock, eHiTS, LigandFit, and FITTED). We found that small inhibitors could be accurately docked by most of the software, while docking of larger compounds (i.e., those with extended aromatic cycles or long aliphatic chains) was more problematic. Overall, Glide provided the best docking results, with the most accurately predicted binding around the active site zinc atom. Further evaluation of Glide's performance revealed its ability to extract active compounds from a benchmark library of decoys.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations56
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProteins Structure Function and BioinformaticsSame topicCarbohydrate Chemistry and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207