ArticleBiophysical journal2011
Rationalizing 5000-fold differences in receptor-binding rate constants of four cytokines.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discovering optimal kinetic pathways for self-assembly using automatic differentiation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Electrostatic Interactions in Protein Structure, Folding, Binding, and Condensation.Chemical reviews · 2018Review
- The conformational feasibility for the formation of reaching dimer in ASV and HIV integrase: a molecular dynamics study.Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics · 2017Article
- Rate Constants and Mechanisms of Protein-Ligand Binding.Annual review of biophysics · 2017Review
- Distinct mechanisms of a phosphotyrosyl peptide binding to two SH2 domains.Journal of theoretical & computational chemistry · 2014Article
- Multifarious determinants of cytokine receptor signaling specificity.Advances in immunology · 2014Review
- Modeling protein association mechanisms and kinetics.Current opinion in structural biology · 2013Review
- PIBiophysical reviews · 2013Article
- Poisson-Boltzmann Calculations: van der Waals or Molecular Surface?Communications in computational physics · 2013Article
- Prediction and dissection of widely-varying association rate constants of actin-binding proteins.PLoS computational biology · 2012Article
- Article
- A common model for cytokine receptor activation: combined scissor-like rotation and self-rotation of receptor dimer induced by class I cytokine.PLoS computational biology · 2012Article
- Automated prediction of protein association rate constants.Structure (London, England : 1993) · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The four cytokines erythropoietin (EPO), interleukin-4 (IL4), human growth hormone (hGH), and prolactin (PRL) all form four-helix bundles and bind to type I cytokine receptors. However, their receptor-binding rate constants span a 5000-fold range. Here, we quantitatively rationalize these vast differences in rate constants by our transient-complex theory for protein-protein association. In the transient complex, the two proteins have near-native separation and relative orientation, but have yet to form the short-range specific interactions of the native complex. The theory predicts the association rate constant as k(a)=k(a0)exp(-ΔG(el)(∗)/k(B)T) where k(a0) is the basal rate constant for reaching the transient complex by random diffusion, and the Boltzmann factor captures the rate enhancement due to electrostatic attraction. We found that the vast differences in receptor-binding rate constants of the four cytokines arise mostly from the differences in charge complementarity among the four cytokine-receptor complexes. The basal rate constants (k(a0)) of EPO, IL4, hGH, and PRL were similar (5.2 × 10(5) M(-1)s(-1), 2.4 × 10(5) M(-1)s(-1), 1.7 × 10(5) M(-1)s(-1), and 1.7 × 10(5) M(-1)s(-1), respectively). However, the average electrostatic free energies (ΔG(e1)(∗)) were very different (-4.2 kcal/mol, -2.4 kcal/mol, -0.1 kcal/mol, and -0.5 kcal/mol, respectively, at ionic strength=160 mM). The receptor-binding rate constants predicted without adjusting any parameters, 6.2 × 10(8) M(-1)s(-1), 1.3 × 10(7) M(-1)s(-1), 2.0 × 10(5) M(-1)s(-1), and 7.6 × 10(4) M(-1)s(-1), respectively, for EPO, IL4, hGH, and PRL agree well with experimental results. We uncover that these diverse rate constants are anticorrelated with the circulation concentrations of the cytokines, with the resulting cytokine-receptor binding rates very close to the limits set by the half-lives of the receptors, suggesting that these binding rates are functionally relevant and perhaps evolutionarily tuned. Our calculations also reproduced well-observed effects of mutations and ionic strength on the rate constants and produced a set of mutations on the complex of hGH with its receptor that putatively enhances the rate constant by nearly 100-fold through increasing charge complementarity. To quantify charge complementarity, we propose a simple index based on the charge distribution within the binding interface, which shows good correlation with ΔG(e1)(∗). Together these results suggest that protein charges can be manipulated to tune k(a) and control biological function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.