@matteoferla, how does Fragmenstein score these guys? Particular questions:
Compound 1 inspiriation fragments are here:
https://fragalysis.diamond.ac.uk/viewer/react/projects/35/71
And the screen-grab:
Compound 2 (and 3) come from the nitrile of x0305 (and others):
https://fragalysis.diamond.ac.uk/viewer/react/projects/35/72
Screen grab:
Sorry, I did not notice there were two submissions.
Okay. I am sorry to say, but your SMILES are wrong. Your heterocycles don’t come out planar. These are aromatic, because you did not specify the Hydrogen or positive charge.
CC(=O)NCCc1c2cc(F)cc(C(CN(Cc3cc(C)on3)C(=O)NC3CC3)c3nnc(C)s3)c2[nH]c1
CC(=O)NCCc1c2cc(C#N)cc(C(CN(Cc3cc(C)on3)C(=O)NC3CC3)c3nnc(C)s3)c2[nH]c1
CC(=O)NCCc1c2cc(Cl)cc(C(CN(Cc3cc(C)on3)C(=O)NC3CC3)c3nnc(C)s3)c2[nH]c1
name | mode | ∆∆G | comRMSD | N_constrained_atoms | runtime | disregarded | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | FRA-DIA-8640f307-1 | none | -15.6921 | 0.88076 | 38 | 16.8203 | [‘x0305’] |
1 | FRA-DIA-8640f307-2 | none | -13.4534 | 0.886753 | 37 | 16.4181 | [‘x0305’] |
2 | FRA-DIA-8640f307-3 | none | -13.8871 | 0.889806 | 37 | 16.9554 | [‘x0305’] |
These are minimised, so they work fine:
@AnthonyA, I hadn’t seen until now those minimisations that @matteoferla had run; according to that, these are very happy compounds.
Please let’s discuss how to get them made…
Hi @frankvondelft, @matteoferla, sorry I didn’t see this earlier. This should now be fixed. Just a bit of the reason for why users cannot edit their SMILES directly:
Implementing this is a pain, because once a compound is ordered/made/assayed, we don’t want the identity to change in our system from what was actually ordered/made/assayed. Furthermore, even before that, CDD integration messes up due to the SMILES being different.
I also believe @alphalee said he has routes for these if you want to get them made.