ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2014
Origins of specificity and affinity in antibody-protein interactions.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 100 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
100 citing papers in PubMed, 204 citations in OpenAlex.
- AutoHMD: scalable and accurate validation of antibody-antigen complexes by heated molecular dynamics.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Deep learning based design of buried hydrogen bond networks with HBDesigner.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Serpin-driven green camouflage and NIR fluorescence in frogs.Science advances · 2026Article
- Signatures of the neutralizing dengue virus-reactive memory B cell repertoire identified by multiplexed envelope dimer probes.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- PatchEpi: patch-aware equivariant learning improves structure-based epitope prediction.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- A Multi-Model Strategy for Optimizing Hepatitis B Virus preS1 Epitope Recognition by the Antibody HzKR127.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Review
- Structural Prediction and Antigenic Characterization of Recombinant Nucleocapsid Protein (p14) of Small Ruminant Lentivirus.Viruses · 2026Article
- AbTune: layer-wise selective fine-tuning of protein language models for antibodies.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Structural and genetic analysis of neutralizing antibodies reveals mechanisms of GII.4 norovirus antigenic evolution.Research square · 2026Article
- In Silico Ligand-Based Screening of PDB Database for Searching Unique Motifs Against SARS-CoV-2.Biomolecules · 2026Article
- Amino Acids Frequency and Interaction Trends: Comprehensive Analysis of Experimentally Validated Viral Antigen-Antibody Complexes.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Article
- Nanobodies in biomedicine: from molecular characteristics to fabrication and clinical translation.Military Medical Research · 2026Review
- Optimizing the breadth of SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies in vivo and in silico.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Review
- Article
- Antibody Polyreactivity: A Challenger of Immune Paradigms.Immunology · 2025Review
- Affinity-stability trade-off mechanism of residue 35 in framework region 2 of VProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2025Article
- Predicting Antibody Affinity Changes upon Mutation Based on Unbound Protein Structures.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Antibodies and cryptographic hash functions: quantifying the specificity paradox.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Structural trends in antibody-antigen binding interfaces: a computational analysis of 1833 experimentally determined 3D structures.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
40 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Natural antibodies are frequently elicited to recognize diverse protein surfaces, where the sequence features of the epitopes are frequently indistinguishable from those of nonepitope protein surfaces. It is not clearly understood how the paratopes are able to recognize sequence-wise featureless epitopes and how a natural antibody repertoire with limited variants can recognize seemingly unlimited protein antigens foreign to the host immune system. In this work, computational methods were used to predict the functional paratopes with the 3D antibody variable domain structure as input. The predicted functional paratopes were reasonably validated by the hot spot residues known from experimental alanine scanning measurements. The functional paratope (hot spot) predictions on a set of 111 antibody-antigen complex structures indicate that aromatic, mostly tyrosyl, side chains constitute the major part of the predicted functional paratopes, with short-chain hydrophilic residues forming the minor portion of the predicted functional paratopes. These aromatic side chains interact mostly with the epitope main chain atoms and side-chain carbons. The functional paratopes are surrounded by favorable polar atomistic contacts in the structural paratope-epitope interfaces; more that 80% these polar contacts are electrostatically favorable and about 40% of these polar contacts form direct hydrogen bonds across the interfaces. These results indicate that a limited repertoire of antibodies bearing paratopes with diverse structural contours enriched with aromatic side chains among short-chain hydrophilic residues can recognize all sorts of protein surfaces, because the determinants for antibody recognition are common physicochemical features ubiquitously distributed over all protein surfaces.
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.