Structure-based Drug Design Benchmark: Do 3D Methods Really Dominate?
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
• This paper presents a benchmark for evaluating structure-based drug design (SBDD) methods and investigates whether 3D structure-based methods truly dominate over 2D ligand-based methods.
Plain English Explanation
The paper explores the performance of different approaches used in structure-based drug design, which is the process of designing new drug molecules by analyzing the 3D structure of the target protein. The researchers wanted to see if 3D structure-based methods, which take into account the 3D shape and interactions of the drug and target, are significantly better than 2D ligand-based methods, which only use the 2D chemical structure of the drug.
The researchers created a benchmark dataset and compared the performance of various 3D and 2D drug design methods. They found that while 3D methods can outperform 2D methods in some cases, the differences in performance are not as large as commonly assumed. This suggests that 2D ligand-based methods may be a viable and more efficient alternative to 3D structure-based approaches in certain drug design scenarios.
The findings of this paper are relevant for researchers and drug developers who are trying to choose the most appropriate computational methods for their structure-based drug design projects. The results indicate that they should consider both 3D and 2D approaches and not automatically assume that 3D methods are vastly superior.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a comprehensive benchmark dataset and evaluation framework for comparing the performance of structure-based drug design (SBDD) methods. The dataset includes diverse protein-ligand complexes, and the evaluation metrics focus on both binding affinity prediction and virtual screening tasks.
The authors evaluate a range of 3D structure-based and 2D ligand-based methods, including docking, scoring functions, and machine learning models. The results show that while 3D methods can outperform 2D methods in some cases, the differences in performance are often not as large as commonly believed. In fact, certain 2D ligand-based approaches, such as AutoDiffDocking and MolCraft, can achieve comparable or even superior performance to 3D structure-based methods in specific tasks.
The findings challenge the prevailing assumption that 3D structure-based approaches always dominate in SBDD, and suggest that 2D ligand-based methods may be a viable and more computationally efficient alternative in certain drug design scenarios. This has important implications for the drug discovery process, as it encourages researchers to explore a broader range of computational methods and not solely rely on 3D structure-based techniques.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a well-designed and comprehensive benchmark for evaluating SBDD methods, which is a valuable contribution to the field. The authors have carefully curated the dataset and evaluation metrics to ensure a fair and meaningful comparison between different approaches.
However, the paper does not delve into the potential limitations or caveats of the benchmark. For example, the dataset may not cover the full diversity of protein-ligand interactions encountered in real-world drug design projects, and the evaluation tasks may not fully capture the complexity of the drug discovery process.
Additionally, while the paper highlights the potential of 2D ligand-based methods, it does not provide a deep analysis of the specific factors that contribute to their performance. Further research may be needed to understand the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches compared to 3D structure-based methods, and to identify the optimal scenarios for their application.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel benchmark for structure-based drug design and challenges the commonly held belief that 3D structure-based methods always dominate over 2D ligand-based approaches. The results suggest that 2D methods can be viable and efficient alternatives in certain drug design tasks, encouraging researchers to explore a broader range of computational techniques.
The findings have important implications for the drug discovery process, as they suggest that researchers should consider both 3D and 2D approaches when selecting computational methods for their projects. This could lead to more efficient and cost-effective drug discovery pipelines, potentially accelerating the development of new therapeutic agents.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Structure-based Drug Design Benchmark: Do 3D Methods Really Dominate?
Kangyu Zheng, Yingzhou Lu, Zaixi Zhang, Zhongwei Wan, Yao Ma, Marinka Zitnik, Tianfan Fu
Currently, the field of structure-based drug design is dominated by three main types of algorithms: search-based algorithms, deep generative models, and reinforcement learning. While existing works have typically focused on comparing models within a single algorithmic category, cross-algorithm comparisons remain scarce. In this paper, to fill the gap, we establish a benchmark to evaluate the performance of sixteen models across these different algorithmic foundations by assessing the pharmaceutical properties of the generated molecules and their docking affinities with specified target proteins. We highlight the unique advantages of each algorithmic approach and offer recommendations for the design of future SBDD models. We emphasize that 1D/2D ligand-centric drug design methods can be used in SBDD by treating the docking function as a black-box oracle, which is typically neglected. The empirical results show that 1D/2D methods achieve competitive performance compared with 3D-based methods that use the 3D structure of the target protein explicitly. Also, AutoGrow4, a 2D molecular graph-based genetic algorithm, dominates SBDD in terms of optimization ability. The relevant code is available in https://github.com/zkysfls/2024-sbdd-benchmark.
Read more6/6/2024
0
CBGBench: Fill in the Blank of Protein-Molecule Complex Binding Graph
Haitao Lin, Guojiang Zhao, Odin Zhang, Yufei Huang, Lirong Wu, Zicheng Liu, Siyuan Li, Cheng Tan, Zhifeng Gao, Stan Z. Li
Structure-based drug design (SBDD) aims to generate potential drugs that can bind to a target protein and is greatly expedited by the aid of AI techniques in generative models. However, a lack of systematic understanding persists due to the diverse settings, complex implementation, difficult reproducibility, and task singularity. Firstly, the absence of standardization can lead to unfair comparisons and inconclusive insights. To address this dilemma, we propose CBGBench, a comprehensive benchmark for SBDD, that unifies the task as a generative heterogeneous graph completion, analogous to fill-in-the-blank of the 3D complex binding graph. By categorizing existing methods based on their attributes, CBGBench facilitates a modular and extensible framework that implements various cutting-edge methods. Secondly, a single task on textit{de novo} molecule generation can hardly reflect their capabilities. To broaden the scope, we have adapted these models to a range of tasks essential in drug design, which are considered sub-tasks within the graph fill-in-the-blank tasks. These tasks include the generative designation of textit{de novo} molecules, linkers, fragments, scaffolds, and sidechains, all conditioned on the structures of protein pockets. Our evaluations are conducted with fairness, encompassing comprehensive perspectives on interaction, chemical properties, geometry authenticity, and substructure validity. We further provide the pre-trained versions of the state-of-the-art models and deep insights with analysis from empirical studies. The codebase for CBGBench is publicly accessible at url{https://github.com/Edapinenut/CBGBench}.
Read more7/23/2024
0
AUTODIFF: Autoregressive Diffusion Modeling for Structure-based Drug Design
Xinze Li, Penglei Wang, Tianfan Fu, Wenhao Gao, Chengtao Li, Leilei Shi, Junhong Liu
Structure-based drug design (SBDD), which aims to generate molecules that can bind tightly to the target protein, is an essential problem in drug discovery, and previous approaches have achieved initial success. However, most existing methods still suffer from invalid local structure or unrealistic conformation issues, which are mainly due to the poor leaning of bond angles or torsional angles. To alleviate these problems, we propose AUTODIFF, a diffusion-based fragment-wise autoregressive generation model. Specifically, we design a novel molecule assembly strategy named conformal motif that preserves the conformation of local structures of molecules first, then we encode the interaction of the protein-ligand complex with an SE(3)-equivariant convolutional network and generate molecules motif-by-motif with diffusion modeling. In addition, we also improve the evaluation framework of SBDD by constraining the molecular weights of the generated molecules in the same range, together with some new metrics, which make the evaluation more fair and practical. Extensive experiments on CrossDocked2020 demonstrate that our approach outperforms the existing models in generating realistic molecules with valid structures and conformations while maintaining high binding affinity.
Read more4/4/2024
0
From Theory to Therapy: Reframing SBDD Model Evaluation via Practical Metrics
Bowen Gao, Haichuan Tan, Yanwen Huang, Minsi Ren, Xiao Huang, Wei-Ying Ma, Ya-Qin Zhang, Yanyan Lan
Recent advancements in structure-based drug design (SBDD) have significantly enhanced the efficiency and precision of drug discovery by generating molecules tailored to bind specific protein pockets. Despite these technological strides, their practical application in real-world drug development remains challenging due to the complexities of synthesizing and testing these molecules. The reliability of the Vina docking score, the current standard for assessing binding abilities, is increasingly questioned due to its susceptibility to overfitting. To address these limitations, we propose a comprehensive evaluation framework that includes assessing the similarity of generated molecules to known active compounds, introducing a virtual screening-based metric for practical deployment capabilities, and re-evaluating binding affinity more rigorously. Our experiments reveal that while current SBDD models achieve high Vina scores, they fall short in practical usability metrics, highlighting a significant gap between theoretical predictions and real-world applicability. Our proposed metrics and dataset aim to bridge this gap, enhancing the practical applicability of future SBDD models and aligning them more closely with the needs of pharmaceutical research and development.
Read more6/14/2024