MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404059365 · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.4c01267

CACHE Challenge #1: Targeting the WDR Domain of LRRK2, A Parkinson’s Disease Associated Protein

2024· article· en· W4404059365 on OpenAlexafffund
Fengling Li, Suzanne Ackloo, C.H. Arrowsmith, Fuqiang Ban, Christopher Barden, Hartmut Beck, Jan Beránek, Francois Berenger, Albina Bolotokova, Guillaume Bret, Marko Breznik, Emanuele Carosati, Irene Chau, Yu Chen, Artem Cherkasov, Dennis Della Corte, Katrin Denzinger, A. Dong, Sorin Draga, Ian Dunn, Kristina Edfeldt, A.M. Edwards, Merveille Eguida, Paul Eisenhuth, Lukas Friedrich, Alexander Fürll, Spencer Gardiner, Francesco Gentile, Pegah Ghiabi, Elisa Gibson, Marta Glavatskikh, Christoph Gorgulla, Judith Günther, Anders Gunnarsson, Filipp Gusev, Evgeny Gutkin, Levon Halabelian, Rachel Harding, Alexander Hillisch, Laurent Hoffer, Anders Hogner, Scott Houliston, John J. Irwin, Olexandr Isayev, Aleksandra Ivanová, Célien Jacquemard, Austin J. Jarrett, Jan H. Jensen, Dmitri Kireev, Julian M. Kleber, S. Benjamin Koby, David Ryan Koes, Ashutosh Kumar, Maria G. Kurnikova, Alina Kutlushina, Uta Lessel, Fabian Ließmann, Sijie Liu, Wei Lu, Jens Meiler, Akhila Mettu, Guzel Minibaeva, Rocco Moretti, Connor J. Morris, Chamali Narangoda, Theresa Noonan, Leon Obendorf, Szymon Pach, Amit Pandit, Sumera Perveen, Gennady Poda, Pavel Polishchuk, Kristina Puls, Vera Pütter, Didier Rognan, Dylan Roskams-Edris, Christina Schindler, François Sindt, Vojtěch Spiwok, Casper Steinmann, Rick Stevens, Valerij Talagayev, Damon Tingey, Oanh Vu, W. Patrick Walters, Xiaowen Wang, Zhenyu Wang, Gerhard Wolber, Clemens Alexander Wolf, Lars Wortmann, Hong Zeng, Carlos Zepeda, Kam Y. J. Zhang, Jixian Zhang, Shuangjia Zheng, Matthieu Schapira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Information and Modeling · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of OttawaTreventis (Canada)Princess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkStructural Genomics Consortium
FundersOffice of Research Infrastructure Programs, National Institutes of HealthJanssen PharmaceuticalsHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeOffice of ScienceNational Institutes of HealthInnovative Medicines InitiativeMcGill UniversityDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftGenentechAlexander von Humboldt-StiftungKungliga Tekniska HögskolanArgonne National LaboratoryNational Institute of General Medical SciencesOntario Genomics InstituteMerck KGaABundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungStrategic Innovation FundGerman Network for Bioinformatics InfrastructureOntario GenomicsGenome CanadaDiamond Light SourceBayerBristol-Myers Squibb FoundationUniversity of MissouriPfizerEuropean Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and AssociationsTakeda Pharmaceutical CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbBoehringer IngelheimStructural Genomics ConsortiumMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's ResearchEuropean CommissionU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLRRK2Parkinson's diseaseDiseaseCacheComputer scienceMedicineCancer researchParallel computingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CACHE challenges are a series of prospective benchmarking exercises to evaluate progress in the field of computational hit-finding. Here we report the results of the inaugural CACHE 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. Of the 1955 molecules predicted by participants in Round 1 of the challenge, 73 were found to bind to LRRK2 in an SPR assay with a K D lower than 150 μM. These 73 molecules were advanced to the Round 2 hit expansion phase, where computational teams each selected up to 50 analogs. Binding was observed in two orthogonal assays for seven chemically diverse series, with affinities ranging from 18 to 140 μM. 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 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations25
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Information and ModelingSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207