Open Access
Open access
volume 11 issue 56 pages 35383-35391

Combination of pose and rank consensus in docking-based virtual screening: the best of both worlds

Valeria Scardino 1, 2, 3
Mariela Bollini 4
Claudio N. Cavasotto 2, 5, 6
Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2021-11-02
scimago Q1
wos Q2
SJR0.777
CiteScore7.6
Impact factor4.6
ISSN20462069
PubMed ID:  35424265
General Chemistry
General Chemical Engineering
Abstract
The use of high-throughput docking (HTD) in the drug discovery pipeline is today widely established. In spite of methodological improvements in docking accuracy (pose prediction), scoring power, ranking power, and screening power in HTD remain challenging. In fact, pose prediction is of critical importance in view of the pose-dependent scoring process, since incorrect poses will necessarily decrease the ranking power of scoring functions. The combination of results from different docking programs (consensus scoring) has been shown to improve the performance of HTD. Moreover, it has been also shown that a pose consensus approach might also result in database enrichment. We present a new methodology named Pose/Ranking Consensus (PRC) that combines both pose and ranking consensus approaches, to overcome the limitations of each stand-alone strategy. This approach has been developed using four docking programs (ICM, rDock, Auto Dock 4, and PLANTS; the first one is commercial, the other three are free). We undertook a thorough analysis for the best way of combining pose and rank strategies, and applied the PRC to a wide range of 34 targets sampling different protein families and binding site properties. Our approach exhibits an improved systematic performance in terms of enrichment factor and hit rate with respect to either pose consensus or consensus ranking alone strategies at a lower computational cost, while always ensuring the recovery of a suitable number of ligands. An analysis using four free docking programs (replacing ICM by Auto Dock Vina) displayed comparable results.
Found 
Found 

Top-30

Journals

1
2
Molecular Informatics
2 publications, 7.69%
Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery
2 publications, 7.69%
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
2 publications, 7.69%
iScience
1 publication, 3.85%
Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences
1 publication, 3.85%
Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics
1 publication, 3.85%
Methods in Molecular Biology
1 publication, 3.85%
Russian Chemical Reviews
1 publication, 3.85%
Journal of Cheminformatics
1 publication, 3.85%
Biomolecules
1 publication, 3.85%
Current Drug Discovery Technologies
1 publication, 3.85%
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
1 publication, 3.85%
Food Bioscience
1 publication, 3.85%
International Journal of Biological Macromolecules
1 publication, 3.85%
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
1 publication, 3.85%
BMC Chemistry
1 publication, 3.85%
PLoS ONE
1 publication, 3.85%
BMC Research Notes
1 publication, 3.85%
ACS Omega
1 publication, 3.85%
Scientific Reports
1 publication, 3.85%
Future Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
1 publication, 3.85%
Kinases and Phosphatases
1 publication, 3.85%
1
2

Publishers

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Springer Nature
7 publications, 26.92%
Elsevier
4 publications, 15.38%
Taylor & Francis
3 publications, 11.54%
American Chemical Society (ACS)
3 publications, 11.54%
MDPI
3 publications, 11.54%
Wiley
2 publications, 7.69%
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
1 publication, 3.85%
Autonomous Non-profit Organization Editorial Board of the journal Uspekhi Khimii
1 publication, 3.85%
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
1 publication, 3.85%
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
1 publication, 3.85%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
  • We do not take into account publications without a DOI.
  • Statistics recalculated weekly.

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
26
Share
Cite this
GOST |
Cite this
GOST Copy
Scardino V. et al. Combination of pose and rank consensus in docking-based virtual screening: the best of both worlds // RSC Advances. 2021. Vol. 11. No. 56. pp. 35383-35391.
GOST all authors (up to 50) Copy
Scardino V., Bollini M., Cavasotto C. N. Combination of pose and rank consensus in docking-based virtual screening: the best of both worlds // RSC Advances. 2021. Vol. 11. No. 56. pp. 35383-35391.
RIS |
Cite this
RIS Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1039/d1ra05785e
UR - https://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI=D1RA05785E
TI - Combination of pose and rank consensus in docking-based virtual screening: the best of both worlds
T2 - RSC Advances
AU - Scardino, Valeria
AU - Bollini, Mariela
AU - Cavasotto, Claudio N.
PY - 2021
DA - 2021/11/02
PB - Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
SP - 35383-35391
IS - 56
VL - 11
PMID - 35424265
SN - 2046-2069
ER -
BibTex |
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors) Copy
@article{2021_Scardino,
author = {Valeria Scardino and Mariela Bollini and Claudio N. Cavasotto},
title = {Combination of pose and rank consensus in docking-based virtual screening: the best of both worlds},
journal = {RSC Advances},
year = {2021},
volume = {11},
publisher = {Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)},
month = {nov},
url = {https://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI=D1RA05785E},
number = {56},
pages = {35383--35391},
doi = {10.1039/d1ra05785e}
}
MLA
Cite this
MLA Copy
Scardino, Valeria, et al. “Combination of pose and rank consensus in docking-based virtual screening: the best of both worlds.” RSC Advances, vol. 11, no. 56, Nov. 2021, pp. 35383-35391. https://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI=D1RA05785E.