Meta-Analysis Reveals That Absolute Binding Free-Energy Calculations Approach Chemical Accuracy
Abstract
Systematic and quantitative analysis of the reliability of formally exact methods that in silico calculate absolute protein-ligand binding free energies remains lacking. Here, we provide, for the first time, evidence-based information on the reliability of these methods by statistically studying 853 cases from 34 different research groups through meta-analysis. The results show that formally exact methods approach chemical accuracy (error = 1.58 kcal/mol), even if people are challenging difficult tasks such as blind drug screening in recent years. The geometrical-pathway-based methods prove to possess a better convergence ability than the alchemical ones, while the latter have a larger application range. We also reveal the importance of always using the latest force fields to guarantee reliability and discuss the pros and cons of turning to an implicit solvent model in absolute binding free-energy calculations. Moreover, based on the meta-analysis, an evidence-based guideline for in silico binding free-energy calculations is provided.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Chaos and quantum thermalization
- The Dalton quantum chemistry program system
- Cord Blood Leptin and Adiponectin as Predictors of Adiposity in Children at 3 Years of Age: A Prospective Cohort Study
- Quantitative metabolomics by H-NMR and LC-MS/MS confirms altered metabolic pathways in diabetes
- Stable adiabatic quantum batteries
- A novel self-lipid antigen targets human T cells against CD1c(+) leukemias
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.