ArticleRoyal Society open science2014
Graphlet signature-based scoring method to estimate protein-ligand binding affinity.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- From homogeneous to heterogeneous network alignment via colored graphlets.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Article
- Exploring the structure and function of temporal networks with dynamic graphlets.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2015Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the years, various computational methodologies have been developed to understand and quantify receptor-ligand interactions. Protein-ligand interactions can also be explained in the form of a network and its properties. The ligand binding at the protein-active site is stabilized by formation of new interactions like hydrogen bond, hydrophobic and ionic. These non-covalent interactions when considered as links cause non-isomorphic sub-graphs in the residue interaction network. This study aims to investigate the relationship between these induced sub-graphs and ligand activity. Graphlet signature-based analysis of networks has been applied in various biological problems; the focus of this work is to analyse protein-ligand interactions in terms of neighbourhood connectivity and to develop a method in which the information from residue interaction networks, i.e. graphlet signatures, can be applied to quantify ligand affinity. A scoring method was developed, which depicts the variability in signatures adopted by different amino acids during inhibitor binding, and was termed as GSUS (graphlet signature uniqueness score). The score is specific for every individual inhibitor. Two well-known drug targets, COX-2 and CA-II and their inhibitors, were considered to assess the method. Residue interaction networks of COX-2 and CA-II with their respective inhibitors were used. Only hydrogen bond network was considered to calculate GSUS and quantify protein-ligand interaction in terms of graphlet signatures. The correlation of the GSUS with pIC50 was consistent in both proteins and better in comparison to the Autodock results. The GSUS scoring method was better in activity prediction of molecules with similar structure and diverse activity and vice versa. This study can be a major platform in developing approaches that can be used alone or together with existing methods to predict ligand affinity from protein-ligand complexes.
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.