Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20602354›Full record

ArticleProteins2010

Antibodies as a model system for comparative model refinement.

Benjamin D Sellers, Jerome P Nilmeier, Matthew P Jacobson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proteins, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Computer-aided antibody design.Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS · 2012
    Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Benjamin D SellersDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California, San Francisco, California 94158-2517, USA.
Jerome P Nilmeier
Matthew P Jacobson

Funding

XRAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC STRUCTURE ANALYSIS: PROTEIN SORTINGP41RR001081 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI KORTEMME, TANJA · 1985 to 2011
$17.6M
Physics-Based Refinement of Comparative Protein ModelsR01GM081710 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI JACOBSON, MATTHEW P · 2007 to 2009
$882k
NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR001081NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR-01081NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM081710NIGMS NIH HHS R01-GM081710
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predicting the conformations of loops is a critical aspect of protein comparative (homology) modeling. Despite considerable advances in developing loop prediction algorithms, refining loops in homology models remains challenging. In this work, we use antibodies as a model system to investigate strategies for more robustly predicting loop conformations when the protein model contains errors in the conformations of side chains and protein backbone surrounding the loop in question. Specifically, our test system consists of partial models of antibodies in which the "scaffold" (i.e., the portion other than the complementarity determining region, CDR, loops) retains native backbone conformation, whereas the CDR loops are predicted using a combination of knowledge-based modeling (H1, H2, L1, L2, and L3) and ab initio loop prediction (H3). H3 is the most variable of the CDRs. Using a previously published method, a test set of 10 shorter H3 loops (5-7 residues) are predicted to an average backbone (N-C alpha-C-O) RMSD of 2.7 A while 11 longer loops (8-9 residues) are predicted to 5.1 A, thus recapitulating the difficulties in refining loops in models. By contrast, in control calculations predicting the same loops in crystal structures, the same method reconstructs the loops to an average of 0.5 and 1.4 A for the shorter and longer loops, respectively. We modify the loop prediction method to improve the ability to sample near-native loop conformations in the models, primarily by reducing the sensitivity of the sampling to the loop surroundings, and allowing the other CDR loops to optimize with the H3 loop. The new method improves the average accuracy significantly to 1.3 A RMSD and 3.1 A RMSD for the shorter and longer loops, respectively. Finally, we present results predicting 8-10 residue loops within complete comparative models of five nonantibody proteins. While anecdotal, these mixed, full-model results suggest our approach is a promising step toward more accurately predicting loops in homology models. Furthermore, while significant challenges remain, our method is a potentially useful tool for predicting antibody structures based on a known Fv scaffold.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularModels, StatisticalComplementarity Determining RegionsCrystallography, X-RayImmunoglobulin FragmentsProtein ConformationStructural Homology, ProteinComplementarity Determining RegionsImmunoglobulin Fragments

Identifiers

PMID20602354
PMCPMC2998178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.