Reactivity axis
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
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 |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | Anodyne | No flags of any kind set | pattern_origin_fk is null | example |
B | Reserved1 | Future Use | no matches | example |
C | PAINS sans mechanism | Worst problem is, PAINS without a clear mechanism matches | pattern_origin_fk =2 | example |
D | Reserved2 | Future Use | no matches | example |
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 |
F | Reserved3 | Future Use | no matches | example |
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. |
H | Reserved4 | Future use | no matches | example |
I | Unstable | Highly reactive | pattern_origin=7 | typically reagents, but could be used for covalent binding. e.g. boronic acids |
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