Back to Hit Triage & Confidence Pack

Illustrative Sample Report • TX-SAMPLE-001

Hit Triage & Confidence Pack

Example target: Human Adenosine A2A Receptor (PDB: 3EML)

This is a de-identified illustrative sample designed to show report structure, deliverable style, and methodological transparency. It is not a real client dossier.

Executive Summary

This illustrative workflow shows how a structured hit-triage engagement can narrow a large compound set into a smaller, reviewable shortlist for downstream experimental follow-up. In this example, a high-throughput virtual screening campaign against the Adenosine A2A Receptor produced a ranked candidate set with favorable docking scores, ligand-efficiency characteristics, and binding-mode features consistent with the defined screening context.

Top Ranked Hits

Sample preview
RankCompound IDVina Score (kcal/mol)Ligand EfficiencyMW (Da)TPSA (Ų)
#1ZINC00023412-10.40.42345.289.4
#2ZINC00059281-10.10.39382.192.1
#3CHEMBL45210-9.80.45310.578.3
#4CHEM_88291-9.60.41333.085.2

Sample preview only — top 4 of 50 shortlisted candidates shown.

Binding Mode Analysis

H-bond: Asn253 (2.8 Å)π-stacking: Phe168Hydrophobic: Leu249Hydrophobic: Ile274LigandZINC00023412Asn253Asn2532.8 ÅPhe168Phe168π-stackingLeu249Leu249HydrophobicIle274Ile274HydrophobicInteraction LegendH-bondπ-stackingHydrophobic
Drag to pan • Scroll to zoom

Key Interactions

  • Hydrogen bond with Asn253 (2.8 Å)
  • π-stacking interaction with Phe168
  • Hydrophobic enclosure by Leu249 and Ile274

Illustrative insight: In this sample, the top-ranked compound occupies a similar sub-pocket to the reference ligand, supporting its inclusion in the shortlisted follow-up set.

Methodology Details

Software Versions

AutoDock Vina 1.2.3

OpenBabel 3.1.1

MGLTools 1.5.7

Search Space

Center: 12.0, -5.3, 22.1

Size: 20Å × 20Å × 20Å

Exhaustiveness: 32

Execution Context

Managed workflow environment

Containerized screening run

Illustrative runtime summary

Notes & Caveats

This sample illustrates how ranked computational outputs can be packaged for internal review and experimental planning.

Rankings should be interpreted within the defined screening context and should not be treated as stand-alone evidence of biological success.

Final candidate selection should always incorporate assay design, chemistry constraints, and experimental priorities specific to the program.

Ready to scope a real hit-triage engagement?

Schedule a Consultation