De novo design builds proteins that have no natural counterpart: a backbone is generated to satisfy a geometric or functional requirement, a sequence is designed to fold into it, and the design is then filtered computationally before anything is expressed. The approach now produces binders, scaffolds and minimal folds at usable success rates, but those rates are still measured in percent of designs tested. We therefore design panels, filter them aggressively, and are explicit about the numbers involved.
Structure is generated first and sequence designed onto it, which produces folds matched to the functional requirement rather than borrowed from a natural protein.
Designs are filtered by structure prediction self-consistency, predicted confidence, interface metrics and stability, which is what raises experimental success rates from negligible to workable.
A functional motif — an epitope, a binding loop, a catalytic arrangement — can be held fixed while a new scaffold is built around it to present it correctly.
Designs are screened for aggregation propensity, disulfide handling and expression-relevant features, since a design that cannot be produced is of no use.
Computational predictions prioritise hypotheses; they do not independently establish binding, biological activity, therapeutic efficacy, safety or clinical validity. Performance depends on input quality, target class, the structural evidence available and the applicability domain of the selected methods. Scores used for ranking are comparative devices and should not be read as measured quantities. All deliverables are for research use only and are not intended for diagnostic or therapeutic use.
| Item | Specification | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Designs delivered | 20–200 sequences | Panel size set by your screening capacity |
| Typical turnaround | 4–10 weeks | Generation, filtering and simulation included |
| Design types | Binders, scaffolds, assemblies | Including motif scaffolding |
| Expected hit rate | Low single-digit percent typical | Target-dependent; stated per project |
We discuss the objective, the decision it supports and the data you hold. Nothing is quoted before we understand what the result has to answer.
We check that the data, target class and available structural evidence can support the proposed approach, and say plainly where they cannot.
Scope, methods, deliverables, timeline and price are confirmed in writing, together with the limitations we expect to report.
The analysis runs on pinned tool versions in a containerised environment, with quality checkpoints and method comparison where that is informative.
You receive the ranked results, the documented methods, the limitations and a proposed validation plan, plus support in interpreting them.
The failure modes that produce confident-looking results which do not survive the next experiment. Each one is designed against rather than discovered afterwards.
Illustrative of the shape this work takes. Details are generalised, no client or target is identified, and scope and outcome vary with the system in question.
Note: ICDMO delivers computational (in silico) services. Results prioritise hypotheses for testing; they do not by themselves establish binding, biological activity, efficacy or safety. All deliverables are for research use only and are not intended for diagnostic or therapeutic use. Downstream experimental work is scoped separately and executed through qualified partners.
Tell us about the target, the data you hold and the decision the result needs to support. A scientist reviews every enquiry and replies within one business day.
