Home
As high-throughput biochemical screens are both expensive and labor intensive, researchers in academia and industry are turning increasingly to virtual-screening methodologies. Virtual screening relies on scoring functions to quickly assess ligand potency. Unfortunately, these scoring functions generally have many false positives and negatives; indeed, a properly trained human being can often assess ligand potency by visual inspection with greater accuracy.
Given the success of the human mind at receptor-ligand complex characterization, we here present two scoring functions based on neural networks, computational models that simulate the microscopic organization of the brain. Computer-aided drug design depends on fast and accurate scoring functions to aid in the identification of small-molecule ligands. The scoring functions presented here, either on their own or used in conjunction with other more traditional functions, may prove useful in drug-discovery projects. Additional information about NNScore 1.0 can be found in the original paper. NNScore 2.0 is described in a separate publication. {LINK, REF}
Note that NNScore 2.0 is not necessarily superior to NNScore 1.0. The best scoring function to use is highly system dependent. Including positive controls (known inhibitors) in virtual screens is a useful way to identify which scoring function is best suited to your needs.
If you use NNScore in your research, please cite the appropriate reference:
NNScore: A Neural-Network-Based Scoring Function for the Characterization of Protein-Ligand Complexes. Jacob D. Durrant, J. Andrew McCammon. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 2010, 50 (10), pp 1865-1871.
{REFERENCE FOR NNSCORE 2.0 HERE}