Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26376645›Full record

ReviewJournal of computer-aided molecular design2015

Thermodynamics of protein-ligand interactions as a reference for computational analysis: how to assess accuracy, reliability and relevance of experimental data.

Stefan G Krimmer, Gerhard Klebe

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. PLBD: protein-ligand binding database of thermodynamic and kinetic intrinsic parameters.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2023
    Article
  5. Frontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Evaluation of new antihypertensive drugs designedSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Stefan G KrimmerDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Marburg, Marbacher Weg 6, 35032, Marburg, Germany. krimmer@staff.uni-marburg.de.
Gerhard KlebeDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Marburg, Marbacher Weg 6, 35032, Marburg, Germany. klebe@staff.uni-marburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For a conscientious interpretation of thermodynamic parameters (Gibbs free energy, enthalpy and entropy) obtained by isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC), it is necessary to first evaluate the experimental setup and conditions at which the data were measured. The data quality must be assessed and the precision and accuracy of the measured parameters must be estimated. This information provides the basis at which level discussion of the data is appropriate, and allows insight into the significance of comparisons with other data. The aim of this article is to provide the reader with basic understanding of the ITC technique and the experimental practices commonly applied, in order to foster an appreciation for how much measured thermodynamic parameters can deviate from ideal, error-free values. Particular attention is paid to the shape of the recorded isotherm (c-value), the influence of the applied buffer used for the reaction (protonation reactions, pH), the chosen experimental settings (temperature), impurities of protein and ligand, sources of systematic errors (solution concentration, solution activity, and device calibration) and to the applied analysis software. Furthermore, we comment on enthalpy-entropy compensation, heat capacities and van't Hoff enthalpies.

Indexed as

SoftwareThermodynamicsBuffersCalorimetryData AccuracyElectronic Data ProcessingEntropyLigandsProtein BindingProteinsProtonsReproducibility of ResultsBuffersLigandsProteinsProtonsData interpretation and correlationData quality and accuracyGood measuring practiceHeat of ionizationIsothermal titration calorimetryvan’t Hoff evaluation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.