Solvated interaction energy: from small-molecule to antibody drug design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scoring functions are ubiquitous in structure-based drug design as an aid to predicting binding modes and estimating binding affinities. Ideally, a scoring function should be broadly applicable, obviating the need to recalibrate and refit its parameters for every new target and class of ligands. Traditionally, drugs have been small molecules, but in recent years biologics, particularly antibodies, have become an increasingly important if not dominant class of therapeutics. This makes the goal of having a transferable scoring function, i.e., one that spans the range of small-molecule to protein ligands, even more challenging. One such broadly applicable scoring function is the Solvated Interaction Energy (SIE), which has been developed and applied in our lab for the last 15 years, leading to several important applications. This physics-based method arose from efforts to understand the physics governing binding events, with particular care given to the role played by solvation. SIE has been used by us and many independent labs worldwide for virtual screening and discovery of novel small-molecule binders or optimization of known drugs. Moreover, without any retraining, it is found to be transferrable to predictions of antibody-antigen relative binding affinities and as accurate as functions trained on protein-protein binding affinities. SIE has been incorporated in conjunction with other scoring functions into ADAPT (Assisted Design of Antibody and Protein Therapeutics), our platform for affinity modulation of antibodies. Application of ADAPT resulted in the optimization of several antibodies with 10-to-100-fold improvements in binding affinity. Further applications included broadening the specificity of a single-domain antibody to be cross-reactive with virus variants of both SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2, and the design of safer antibodies by engineering of a pH switch to make them more selective towards acidic tumors while sparing normal tissues at physiological pH.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".