@anunesalves@LatinXChem We plan to continue this work by refining these molecules for better interaction with the protein, so we would start by substituting this sulfoxide group with some other group that shows better surface complementarity. Thanks for asking. (3/3)
@anunesalves@LatinXChem this group is uncoupled from the protein cavity, and exposed to the solvent accordingly, but the rest of the molecule remains bound in the cavity, so we see the jump between their COMs distances. (2/3)
@anunesalves@LatinXChem Yes, we also analyzed the RMSD of the ligands in the complex to study their stability, but to demonstrate that the ligands remain within the active site we decided to show the distances between their COMs. Due to the high polarity of the sulfoxide group of the GDC, (1/3)
@quimeds@LatinXChem And we plan to improve the accuracy of the affinity energy of the molecules listed in Table 2, through methods such as LIE or MM/PBSA using molecular dynamics.
@quimeds@LatinXChem Hi! Yes, the dG values in the poster were obtained by the molecular docking protocol supported by the pharmacophore. All of these values are shown in graph 1, and in the table 2 are emphasized the values of the molecules with best liggand efficiency. Thanks for asking.