Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27166787›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

CLUB-MARTINI: Selecting Favourable Interactions amongst Available Candidates, a Coarse-Grained Simulation Approach to Scoring Docking Decoys.

Qingzhen Hou, Marc F Lensink, Jaap Heringa, K Anton Feenstra

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Computer aided drug design in the development of proteolysis targeting chimeras.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Protein-protein interaction prediction with deep learning: A comprehensive review.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Deep Learning for Protein-Protein Interaction Site Prediction.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021
    Article
  9. Coarse-grained (hybrid) integrative modeling of biomolecular interactions.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2020
    Review
  10. Predicting Protein Dimer Structures Using MELD × MD.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2019
    Article
  11. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Qingzhen HouCenter for Integrative Bioinformatics VU (IBIVU), VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1081A, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marc F LensinkUniversity Lille, CNRS, UMR8576 UGSF - Institute for Structural and Functional Glycobiology, F-59000, Lille, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3957-9470
Jaap HeringaCenter for Integrative Bioinformatics VU (IBIVU), VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1081A, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
K Anton FeenstraCenter for Integrative Bioinformatics VU (IBIVU), VU University Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1081A, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6755-9667
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large-scale identification of native binding orientations is crucial for understanding the role of protein-protein interactions in their biological context. Measuring binding free energy is the method of choice to estimate binding strength and reveal the relevance of particular conformations in which proteins interact. In a recent study, we successfully applied coarse-grained molecular dynamics simulations to measure binding free energy for two protein complexes with similar accuracy to full-atomistic simulation, but 500-fold less time consuming. Here, we investigate the efficacy of this approach as a scoring method to identify stable binding conformations from thousands of docking decoys produced by protein docking programs. To test our method, we first applied it to calculate binding free energies of all protein conformations in a CAPRI (Critical Assessment of PRedicted Interactions) benchmark dataset, which included over 19000 protein docking solutions for 15 benchmark targets. Based on the binding free energies, we ranked all docking solutions to select the near-native binding modes under the assumption that the native-solutions have lowest binding free energies. In our top 100 ranked structures, for the 'easy' targets that have many near-native conformations, we obtain a strong enrichment of acceptable or better quality structures; for the 'hard' targets without near-native decoys, our method is still able to retain structures which have native binding contacts. Moreover, in our top 10 selections, CLUB-MARTINI shows a comparable performance when compared with other state-of-the-art docking scoring functions. As a proof of concept, CLUB-MARTINI performs remarkably well for many targets and is able to pinpoint near-native binding modes in the top selections. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time interaction free energy calculated from MD simulations have been used to rank docking solutions at a large scale.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMolecular Docking SimulationMolecular Dynamics SimulationBinding SitesDatabases, ProteinKineticsProtein BindingProtein Conformation, alpha-HelicalProtein Conformation, beta-StrandProtein Interaction Domains and MotifsProtein Interaction MappingProteinsThermodynamicsProteins

Identifiers

PMID27166787
PMCPMC4864233
OpenAlexW2392351795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.