Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23088250›Full record

ArticleBiochemistry2012

Binding efficiency of protein-protein complexes.

Eric S Day, Shaun M Cote, Adrian Whitty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biochemistry, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Direct Quantification of Protein-Protein Interactions in Living Bacterial Cells.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Tetracycline as an inhibitor to the SARS-CoV-2.Journal of cellular biochemistry · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Conformational states of TNFR1 as a molecular switch for receptor function.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Eric S DayBiogen Idec, 14 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, United States.
Shaun M Cote
Adrian Whitty

Funding

Design of Macrocyclic Inhibitors of the NEMO/IKKa/b Protein-Protein InteractionR01GM094551 · NIGMS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI WHITTY, ADRIAN · 2010 to 2013
$1.7M
Quantitative Analysis of RET Receptor Activation and SignalingR01GM087469 · NIGMS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY (CHARLES RIVER CAMPUS) · PI WHITTY, ADRIAN · 2010 to 2013
$1.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM087469NIGMS NIH HHS GM094551NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM087469NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM094551
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We examine the relationship between binding affinity and interface size for reversible protein-protein interactions (PPIs), using cytokines from the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) superfamily and their receptors as a test case. Using surface plasmon resonance, we measured single-site binding affinities for binding of the large receptor TNFR1 to its ligands TNFα (K(D) = 1.4 ± 0.4 nM) and lymphotoxin-α (K(D) = 50 ± 10 nM), and also for binding of the small receptor Fn14 to TWEAK (K(D) = 70 ± 10 nM). We additionally assembled data for all other TNF-TNFR family complexes for which reliable single-site binding affinities have been reported. We used these values to calculate the binding efficiencies, defined as binding energy per square angstrom of surface area buried at the contact interface, for nine of these complexes for which cocrystal structures are available, and compared the results to those for a set of 144 protein-protein complexes with published affinities. The results show that the most efficient PPI complexes generate ~20 cal mol(-1) Å(-2) of binding energy. A minimal contact area of ~500 Å(2) is required for a stable complex, required to generate sufficient interaction energy to pay the entropic cost of colocalizing two proteins from 1 M solution. The most compact and efficient TNF-TNFR complex was the BAFF-BR3 complex, which achieved ~80% of the maximal achievable binding efficiency. Other small receptors also gave high binding efficiencies, while the larger receptors generated only 44-49% of this limit despite interacting primarily through just a single small domain. The results provide new insight into how much binding energy can be generated by a PPI interface of a given size, and establish a quantitative method for predicting how large a natural or engineered contact interface must be to achieve a given level of binding affinity.

Indexed as

Protein BindingCytokine TWEAKKineticsLigandsLymphotoxin-alphaReceptors, Tumor Necrosis FactorReceptors, Tumor Necrosis Factor, Type ISurface Plasmon ResonanceTumor Necrosis FactorsTWEAK ReceptorCytokine TWEAKLigandsLymphotoxin-alphaReceptors, Tumor Necrosis FactorReceptors, Tumor Necrosis Factor, Type ITNFRSF12A protein, humanTNFSF12 protein, humanTumor Necrosis FactorsTWEAK Receptor

Identifiers

PMID23088250
PMCPMC3567247

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.