Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

3D QSAR methods: Phase and Catalyst compared.

David A Evans1, Thompson N Doman, David A Thorner

  • 1Eli Lilly and Company Ltd., Lilly Research Centre, Erl Wood Manor, Sunninghill Road, Windlesham, Surrey, GU20 6PH, England.

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
|May 5, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

FMOPhore for hotspot identification and efficient fragment-to-lead growth strategies.

Nature communications·2026
Same author

Effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in pediatric Crohn's disease: Results of the REALITI study.

Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition·2026
Same author

Decoding efficacy and resistance space at a drug binding site.

Nature communications·2026
Same author

Biosimilar Therapeutics Substitution: American Academy of Neurology Position Statement.

Neurology. Clinical practice·2026
Same author

Different chemical scaffolds bind to L-phe site in Mycobacterium tuberculosis Phe-tRNA synthetase.

European journal of medicinal chemistry·2025
Same author

Addendum: Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3.

Nature·2024
Same journal

PSDTA: An Approach to Drug-Target Binding Affinity Prediction by Integrating Physicochemical and Structural Information to Reduce Feature Redundancy.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

M-JEPA: Predictive Self-Supervised Learning for Molecular Graphs with Scaffold-Shift Evaluation on Tox21.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

Advancing Biochemical Molecule Registration, Representation and Search for New Drug Modalities.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

A Unified Molecular Graph and Protein Language Model Framework for Predicting Human Drug-Hormone Receptor Interactions with Structure-Aware Validation.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

Intricate Role of Cholesterol in Membrane Fusion.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same journal

tmGNN-XAI: An Explainable Graph Neural Network Tool for Predicting Electronic Properties of Transition Metal Complexes from SMILES.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
See all related articles

Phase and Catalyst HypoGen were compared for quantitative structure-activity relationship modeling. Phase demonstrated superior or equal performance in predicting compound activity across multiple datasets, highlighting its effectiveness in drug discovery research.

Area of Science:

  • Computational Chemistry
  • Medicinal Chemistry
  • Drug Discovery

Background:

  • Quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) are crucial for predicting drug efficacy.
  • Computational tools like Phase and Catalyst HypoGen are widely used for QSAR modeling.
  • Comparing the performance of different QSAR software is essential for optimizing drug design workflows.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the performance of Phase and Catalyst HypoGen in generating three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship (3D-QSAR) models.
  • To evaluate the predictive accuracy of models generated by each program using independent test sets.
  • To investigate the impact of parameter variations and ligand-receptor complex analysis on model performance.

Main Methods:

  • Eight diverse compound activity datasets were curated from public literature.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Automated procedures were employed for partitioning data into training and test sets.
  • Multiple 3D-QSAR models were built using Phase and Catalyst HypoGen with varied parameters.
  • Model performance was assessed based on prediction accuracy on unseen test data.
  • Ligand-based pharmacophore generation was guided by overlaying compounds onto crystallographic receptor structures.

    • Main Results:

    • Phase consistently achieved performance equal to or better than Catalyst HypoGen across all tested datasets.
    • Investigating parameter variations did not significantly alter the relative performance between the two programs.
    • Utilizing crystallographic data to guide pharmacophore generation did not yield improved predictive models for either program.

    Conclusions:

    • Phase is a highly effective tool for 3D-QSAR modeling, demonstrating robust predictive performance.
    • Catalyst HypoGen's performance was found to be less favorable compared to Phase under the tested conditions.
    • Current methods for pharmacophore generation, even when guided by structural data, may require further refinement for enhanced predictive power in QSAR.