ArticleJournal of the American Chemical Society2014
Identification of ligand-target pairs from combined libraries of small molecules and unpurified protein targets in cell lysates.
Article in Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 91 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unleashing the power of DNA-encoded libraries for challenging targets in drug discovery.Pharmaceutical science advances · 2026Review
- A hybrid unsupervised methodology on artificial intelligence filtering for automatically processing cellular DNA-encoded library (DEL) datasets.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Evolution of chemistry and selection technology for DNA-encoded library.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2024Review
- Accelerating Genetic Sensor Development, Scale-up, and Deployment Using Synthetic Biology.Biodesign research · 2024Article
- Recording Binding Information Directly into DNA-Encoded Libraries Using Terminal Deoxynucleotidyl Transferase.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2023Article
- Small-molecule discovery through DNA-encoded libraries.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2023Review
- Machine-Learning-Based Data Analysis Method for Cell-Based Selection of DNA-Encoded Libraries.ACS omega · 2023Article
- Synthesis of Protein-Oligonucleotide Conjugates.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- Biomacromolecule-Assisted Screening for Reaction Discovery and Catalyst Optimization.Chemical reviews · 2022Review
- Opportunities for Expanding Encoded Chemical Diversification and Improving Hit Enrichment in mRNA-Displayed Peptide Libraries.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2022Review
- Recent advances in DNA-encoded dynamic libraries.RSC chemical biology · 2022Review
- Converting Double-Stranded DNA-Encoded Libraries (DELs) to Single-Stranded Libraries for More Versatile Selections.ACS omega · 2022Article
- Strategies for developing DNA-encoded libraries beyond binding assays.Nature chemistry · 2022Review
- Directed evolution of orthogonal RNA-RBP pairs through library-vs-library in vitro selection.Nucleic acids research · 2022Article
- Revealing protein-protein interactions at the transcriptome scale by sequencing.Molecular cell · 2021Article
- DNA-Encoded Chemical Libraries: A Comprehensive Review with Succesful Stories and Future Challenges.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2021Review
- Selection of DNA-encoded chemical libraries against endogenous membrane proteins on live cells.Nature chemistry · 2021Article
- Comparative evaluation of DNA-encoded chemical selections performed using DNA in single-stranded or double-stranded format.Biochemical and biophysical research communications · 2020Article
- A Single-Stranded DNA-Encoded Chemical Library Based on a Stereoisomeric Scaffold Enables Ligand Discovery by Modular Assembly of Building Blocks.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2020Article
- Non-'classical' MEKs: A review of MEK3-7 inhibitors.Bioorganic & medicinal chemistry letters · 2020Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We describe the development and validation of interaction determination using unpurified proteins (IDUP), a method that selectively amplifies DNA sequences identifying ligand+target pairs from a mixture of DNA-linked small molecules and unpurified protein targets in cell lysates. By operating in cell lysates, IDUP preserves native post-translational modifications and interactions with endogenous binding partners, thereby enabling the study of difficult-to-purify targets and increasing the potential biological relevance of detected interactions compared with methods that require purified proteins. In IDUP, target proteins are associated with DNA oligonucleotide tags either non-covalently using a DNA-linked antibody or covalently using a SNAP-tag. Ligand-target binding promotes hybridization of a self-priming hairpin that is extended by a DNA polymerase to create a DNA strand that contains sequences identifying both the target and its ligand. These sequences encoding ligand+target pairs are selectively amplified by PCR and revealed by high-throughput DNA sequencing. IDUP can respond to the effect of affinity-modulating adaptor proteins in cell lysates that would be absent in ligand screening or selection methods using a purified protein target. This capability was exemplified by the 100-fold amplification of DNA sequences encoding FRB+rapamycin or FKBP+rapamycin in samples overexpressing both FRB and FKBP (FRB·rapamycin+FKBP, Kd ≈ 100 fM; FKBP·rapamycin+FRB, Kd = 12 nM). In contrast, these sequences were amplified 10-fold less efficiently in samples overexpressing either FRB or FKBP alone (rapamycin+FKBP, Kd ≈ 0.2 nM; rapamcyin+FRB, Kd = 26 μM). Finally, IDUP was used to process a model library of DNA-linked small molecules and a model library of cell lysates expressing SNAP-target fusions combined in a single sample. In this library×library experiment, IDUP resulted in enrichment of sequences corresponding to five known ligand+target pairs ranging in binding affinity from Kd = 0.2 nM to 3.2 μM out of 67,858 possible combinations, with no false positive signals enriched to the same extent as that of any of the bona fide ligand+target pairs.
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.