The comparisons show that average measures for both “early” and “global” enrichment for Glide 2.5 are 3 times higher than for Glide 1.8 and more than 2 times higher than for Glide 2.0 because of better results for the least well-handled screens. Results are presented for releases 1.8, 2.0, and 2.5 of Glide. To make the database screens as realistic as possible, the screens use sets of “druglike” decoy ligands that have been selected to be representative of what we believe is likely to be found in the compound collection of a pharmaceutical or biotechnology company. In many cases, two, or even three, protein sites are employed to probe the sensitivity of the results to the site geometry. Glide's ability to identify active compounds in a database screen is characterized by applying Glide to a diverse set of nine protein receptors.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |