Reactivity axis: Difference between revisions

From DISI
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Frodo moved page Clean axis to Reactivity axis: we now use reactivity instead of clean)
(No difference)

Revision as of 15:48, 27 August 2015

Here we describe the "clean" axis in the exported subsets of ZINC15.

Traditionally, ZINC standard subsets included: A, B, C, D, E.

ZINC "clean" subsets were just A, B, C, D.

The Clean Axis

Class Nickname Description How computed Examples internal score
A Anodyne No flags of any kind set pattern_origin_fk is null example 0
B Reserved1 Future Use no matches example 5
C PAINS sans mechanism Worst problem is, PAINS without a clear mechanism matches pattern_origin_fk =2 example 10
D Reserved2 Future Use no matches example 20
E mildly reactive mildly electrophilic or nucleophilic group, including PAINS where these mechanisms have been assigned. pattern_type_fk in (1,2) aldhydes, thiols, michael acceptors, epoxides 30
F Reserved3 Future Use no matches example 40
G reactive electrophile or nucleophile, including PAINS where these mechanisms have been assigned pattern_type in (3,4) alpha halo ketones, alkyl halides. Note includes cancer drugs. 50
H Reserved4 Future use no matches example 60
I Unstable Highly reactive pattern_origin=7 typically reagents, but could be used for covalent binding. e.g. boronic acids 70

other concepts mentioned, must be fit in: chelation, redox, covalent, amphiphilicity

poor derivatizability, optimizability

we never build protomers of H, G, F.

we need to classify pains by assumed mechanism

397 pains never hit any compound in zinc