Evidence Hub

Demonstrating the Absence of Correlation Between Molecular Docking and in vitro Cytotoxicity in Anti-Breast Cancer Research: Root Causes and Practical Resolutions

S. Megantara, Agus Rusdin, Arif Budiman, Lisa Efriani Puluhulawa, N. K. Ikram, Muchtaridi Muchtaridi

Breast Cancer, 2025

14 citations

Abstract

Introduction In silico methods have significantly transformed the landscape of drug discovery by enabling rapid and cost-effective screening of prospective therapeutic compounds. However, these computational techniques remain limited in their ability to fully predict complex biological behavior, particularly within the constraints of quantum level interactions and simplified receptor-ligand models. As such, validation through experimental data remains critical. Purpose This review aims to critically evaluate the correlation between molecular docking predictions specifically Gibbs free energy (ΔG) and in vitro cytotoxicity data (IC50 values) obtained from MCF-7 breast cancer cell studies. Methodology A structured methodology was employed, applying predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify studies reporting both in silico molecular docking results and in vitro cytotoxicity data on the MCF-7 cell line, with a focus on compounds targeting breast cancer–related proteins. Results Findings demonstrated that, contrary to theoretical expectations, no consistent linear correlation was observed between ΔG values and IC50 across the analyzed compounds and targets. This discrepancy arises from several intertwined factors, including variability in protein expression within cell-based systems, compound-specific characteristics such as permeability and metabolic stability, and methodological limitations of docking approaches that rely on rigid receptor conformations and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a review, done in cell cultures (in vitro) and computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free