CACHE Challenge #1: targeting the WDR domain of LRRK2, a Parkinson’s Disease associated protein
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The CACHE challenges are a series of prospective benchmarking exercises meant to evaluate progress in the field of computational hit-finding. Here we report the results of the inaugural CACHE #1 challenge in which 23 computational teams each selected up to 100 commercially available compounds that they predicted would bind to the WDR domain of the Parkinson’s disease target LRRK2, a domain with no known ligand and only an apo structure in the PDB. The lack of known binding data and presumably low druggability of the target is a challenge to computational hit finding methods. Seventy-three of the 1955 procured molecules bound LRRK2 in an SPR assay with K D lower than 150 μM and were advanced to a hit expansion phase where computational teams each selected up to 50 analogs each. Binding was observed in two orthogonal assays with affinities ranging from 18 to 140 μM for seven chemically diverse series. The seven successful computational workflows varied in their screening strategies and techniques. Three used molecular dynamics to produce a conformational ensemble of the targeted site, three included a fragment docking step, three implemented a generative design strategy and five used one or more deep learning steps. CACHE #1 reflects a highly exploratory phase in computational drug design where participants sometimes adopted strikingly diverging screening strategies. Machine-learning accelerated methods achieved similar results to brute force (e.g. exhaustive) docking. First-in-class, experimentally confirmed compounds were rare and weakly potent, indicating that recent advances are not sufficient to effectively address challenging targets.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".