The spatial or 3D structure of a molecule is particularly relevant to modeling its activity in QSAR. The 3D structural information affects molecular properties and chemical reactivities and thus it is important to incorporate them in deep learning models built for molecules. A key aspect of the spatial structure of molecules is the flexible distribution of their constituent atoms known as conformation. Given the temperature of a molecular system, the probability of each of its possible conformation is defined by its formation energy and this follows a Boltzmann distribution [McQuarrie and Simon, 1997]. The Boltzmann distribution tells us the probability of a certain confirmation given its potential energy. The different conformations of a molecule could result in different properties and activity. Therefore, it is imperative to consider multiple conformers in molecular deep learning to ensure that the notion of conformational flexibility is embedded in the model developed. The model should also be able to capture the Boltzmann distribution of the potential energy related to the conformers.
Continue readingCategory Archives: Cheminformatics
Comparing pose and affinity prediction methods for follow-up designs from fragments
In any task in the realm of virtual screening, there need to be many filters applied to a dataset of ligands to downselect the ‘best’ ones on a number of parameters to produce a manageable size. One popular filter is if a compound has a physical pose and good affinity as predicted by tools such as docking or energy minimisation. In my pipeline for downselecting elaborations of compounds proposed as fragment follow-ups, I calculate the pose and ΔΔG by energy minimizing the ligand with atom restraints to matching atoms in the fragment inspiration. I either use RDKit using its MMFF94 forcefield or PyRosetta using its ref2015 scorefunction, all made possible by the lovely tool Fragmenstein.
With RDKit as the minimizer the protein neighborhood around the ligand is fixed and placements take on average 21s whereas with PyRosetta placements, they take on average 238s (and I can run placements in parallel luckily). I would ideally like to use RDKit as the placement method since it is so fast and I would like to perform 500K within a few days but, I wanted to confirm that RDKit is ‘good enough’ compared to the slightly more rigorous tool PyRosetta (it allows residues to relax and samples more conformations with the longer runtime I think).
Fine-tune generated molecular poses with a force field
Some molecular pose generation methods benefit from an energy relaxation post-processing step.
Here is a quick way to do this using OpenMM via a short script I prepared:
Continue readingMapping derivative compounds to parent hits
Whereas it is easy to say in a paper “Given the HT-Sequential-ITC results, 42 led to 113, a substituted decahydro-2,6-methanocyclopropa[f]indene”, it is frequently rather trickier algorithmically figure out which atoms map to which. In Fragmenstein, for the placement route, for example, a lot goes on behind the scenes, yet for some cases human provided mapping may be required. Here I discuss how to get the mapping from Fragmenstein and what goes on behind the scenes.
Continue readingRSC Fragments 2024
I attended RSC Fragments 2024 (Hinxton, 4–5 March 2024), a conference dedicated to fragment-based drug discovery. The various talks were really good, because they gave overviews of projects involving teams across long stretches of time. As a result there were no slides discussing wet lab protocol optimisations and not a single Western blot was seen. The focus was primarily either illustrating a discovery platform or recounting a declassified campaign. The latter were interesting, although I’d admit I wish there had been more talk of organic chemistry —there was not a single moan/gloat about a yield. This top-down focus was nice as topics kept overlapping, namely:
- Target choice,
- covalents,
- molecular glues,
- whether to escape Flatland,
- thermodynamics, and
- cryptic pockets
Finding and testing a reaction SMARTS pattern for any reaction
Have you ever needed to find a reaction SMARTS pattern for a certain reaction but don’t have it already written out? Do you have a reaction SMARTS pattern but need to test it on a set of reactants and products to make sure it transforms them correctly and doesn’t allow for odd reactants to work? I recently did and I spent some time developing functions that can:
- Generate a reaction SMARTS for a reaction given two reactants, a product, and a reaction name.
- Check the reaction SMARTS on a list of reactants and products that have the same reaction name.
The workings of Fragmenstein’s RDKit neighbour-aware minimisation
Fragmenstein is a Python module that combine hits or position a derivative following given templates by being very strict in obeying them. This is done by creating a “monster”, a compound that has the atomic positions of the templates, which then reanimated by very strict energy minimisation. This is done in two steps, first in RDKit with an extracted frozen neighbourhood and then in PyRosetta within a flexible protein. The mapping for both combinations and placements are complicated, but I will focus here on a particular step the minimisation, primarily in answer to an enquiry, namely how does the RDKit minimisation work.
Demystifying the thermodynamics of ligand binding
Chemoinformatics uses a curious jumble of terms from thermodynamics, wet-lab techniques and statistical terminology, which is at its most jarring, it could be argued, in machine learning. In some datasets one often sees pIC50, pEC50, pKi and pKD, in discussion sections a medchemist may talk casually of entropy, whereas in the world of molecular mechanics everything is internal energy. Herein I hope to address some common misconceptions and unify these concepts.
Continue readingConference feedback — with a difference
At OPIG Group Meetings, it’s customary to give “Conference Feedback” whenever any of us has recently attended a conference. Typically, people highlight the most interesting talks—either to them or others in the group.
Having just returned from the 6th RSC-BMCS / RSC-CICAG AI in Chemistry Symposium, it was my turn last week. But instead of the usual perspective—of an attendee—I spoke briefly about how to organize a conference.
Continue readingA Simple Way to Quantify the Similarity Between Two Sets of Molecules
When designing machine learning algorithms with the aim of accelerating the discovery of novel and more effective therapeutics, we often care deeply about their ability to generalise to new regions of chemical space and accurately predict the properties of molecules that are structurally or functionally dissimilar to the ones we have already explored. To evaluate the performance of algorithms in such an out-of-distribution setting, it is essential that we are able to quantify the data shift that is induced by the train-test splits that we rely on to decide which model to deploy in production.
For our recent ICML 2023 paper Drug Discovery under Covariate Shift with Domain-Informed Prior Distributions over Functions, we chose to quantify the distributional similarity between two sets of molecules through the Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD).
Continue reading