ArticleProteins2015
Different combinations of atomic interactions predict protein-small molecule and protein-DNA/RNA affinities with similar accuracy.
Article in Proteins, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- InteracTor: Feature engineering and explainable AI for profiling protein structure-interaction-function relationships.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- First report on chemometrics-driven multilayered lead prioritization in addressing oxysterol-mediated overexpression of G protein-coupled receptor 183.Molecular diversity · 2024Article
- Structural predictions of protein-DNA binding: MELD-DNA.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- Direct Molecular Evidence for an Ancient, Conserved Developmental Toolkit Controlling Posttranscriptional Gene Regulation in Land Plants.Molecular biology and evolution · 2021Article
- Alignment-Integrated Reconstruction of Ancestral Sequences Improves Accuracy.Genome biology and evolution · 2020Article
- Blind tests of RNA-protein binding affinity prediction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Convergence of Domain Architecture, Structure, and Ligand Affinity in Animal and Plant RNA-Binding Proteins.Molecular biology and evolution · 2017Article
- The joint NETTAB/Integrative Bioinformatics 2015 Meeting: aims, topics and outcomes.BMC bioinformatics · 2017Article
- Improving the accuracy of high-throughput protein-protein affinity prediction may require better training data.BMC bioinformatics · 2017Article
- Resurrecting ancestral structural dynamics of an antiviral immune receptor: adaptive binding pocket reorganization repeatedly shifts RNA preference.BMC evolutionary biology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interactions between proteins and other molecules play essential roles in all biological processes. Although it is widely held that a protein's ligand specificity is determined primarily by its three-dimensional structure, the general principles by which structure determines ligand binding remain poorly understood. Here we use statistical analyses of a large number of protein-ligand complexes with associated binding-affinity measurements to quantitatively characterize how combinations of atomic interactions contribute to ligand affinity. We find that there are significant differences in how atomic interactions determine ligand affinity for proteins that bind small chemical ligands, those that bind DNA/RNA and those that interact with other proteins. Although protein-small molecule and protein-DNA/RNA binding affinities can be accurately predicted from structural data, models predicting one type of interaction perform poorly on the others. Additionally, the particular combinations of atomic interactions required to predict binding affinity differed between small-molecule and DNA/RNA data sets, consistent with the conclusion that the structural bases determining ligand affinity differ among interaction types. In contrast to what we observed for small-molecule and DNA/RNA interactions, no statistical models were capable of predicting protein-protein affinity with >60% correlation. We demonstrate the potential usefulness of protein-DNA/RNA binding prediction as a possible tool for high-throughput virtual screening to guide laboratory investigations, suggesting that quantitative characterization of diverse molecular interactions may have practical applications as well as fundamentally advancing our understanding of how molecular structure translates into 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.