Back

Molecular size dominates α2-adrenergic subtype-selectivity benchmarks: five controls for reducing attrition in selective ligand design

Nael, M. A.; Elokely, K.

2026-08-23 pharmacology and toxicology
10.64898/2026.08.18.745649 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Subtype-selectivity predictions are scored against measured selectivity and judged against an assumed noise ceiling. We asked what an 2-adrenergic benchmark rewards and which controls change its interpretation. Research design and methods: On a frozen benchmark of 586 paired 2A/2C compounds we evaluated Glide SP docking, CNN rescoring, ligand-only fingerprint models, receptor descriptors and pose contacts, with dopamine D3/D2 as comparator, applying five controls: a measured ceiling, a cluster-identity null, a nonselective reference, a same-receptor floor and a trivial-descriptor baseline. Results: Five descriptors from SMILES reached Spearman 0.645, 72% of the measured ceiling, against 0.071 for Glide SP and 0.188 for CNN rescoring; receptor properties and pose contacts reduced to size under control, while a non-size signal of 0.258 survived. Measured rather than propagated noise raised that ceiling from 0.704 to 0.897; cluster identity alone reached R2 0.499 on D3/D2 and none on 2; a nonselective reference received +1.43 to +4.79 kcal/mol where zero is expected; and a same-receptor floor reached 1.77-fold against 1.88-fold across subtypes. Conclusions: Such benchmarks reward molecular size first; a method must exceed 0.645 before its score indicates structural reasoning. The controls are inexpensive; conclusions rest on two receptor pairs, a three-pair floor and static structures.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.