Implementing QM in docking calculations: is it a waste of computational time?
Abstract
The greatest challenge in molecular docking (MD) is the deficiency of scoring functions (SFs), which limits their reliability. SFs are too simplified to represent the true features of the complex free energy of protein-ligand interactions. Investigations of docking functions have traded accuracy for speed through the use of approximations and simplifications. Consequently, there has been an increase in the popularity of quantum-mechanical (QM)-based methods as reference points for the development of fast, reliable, valuable, yet inexpensive, tools. As we discuss here, one significant QM-based parameter used to predict docking is the accuracy of atomic partial charges, which is strongly related to the accuracy of the SF prediction.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a review, done in 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.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Chaos and quantum thermalization
- The Dalton quantum chemistry program system
- Quantum dots: synthesis, bioapplications, and toxicity
- Cord Blood Leptin and Adiponectin as Predictors of Adiposity in Children at 3 Years of Age: A Prospective Cohort Study
- A Guide to In Silico Drug Design
- Quantitative metabolomics by H-NMR and LC-MS/MS confirms altered metabolic pathways in diabetes
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.