Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27599357›Full record

ArticleBiochimica et biophysica acta. General subjects2017

Evaluation and Minimization of Uncertainty in ITC Binding Measurements: Heat Error, Concentration Error, Saturation, and Stoichiometry.

Samuel A Kantonen, Niel M Henriksen, Michael K Gilson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biochimica et biophysica acta. General subjects, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Obtaining precise and accurate results by ITC.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Accounting for apparent deviations between calorimetric and van't Hoff enthalpies.Biochimica et biophysica acta. General subjects · 2018
    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

3 authors.

Samuel A KantonenSkaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, California 92093-0736, USA.
Niel M HenriksenSkaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, California 92093-0736, USA.
Michael K GilsonSkaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, California 92093-0736, USA. Electronic address: mgilson@ucsd.edu.

Funding

MOLECULAR BIOPHYSICS TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM008326 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI KOMIVES, ELIZABETH A. · 1989 to 2020
$7.5M
THEORY AND MODELING OF NONCOVALENT BINDINGR01GM061300 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MD BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE · PI GILSON, MICHAEL K. · 2000 to 2021
$7.2M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM061300NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM008326
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIsothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) is uniquely useful for characterizing binding thermodynamics, because it straightforwardly provides both the binding enthalpy and free energy. However, the precision of the results depends on the experimental setup and how thermodynamic results are obtained from the raw data.

methodsExperiments and Monte Carlo analysis are used to study how uncertainties in injection heat and concentration propagate to binding enthalpies in various scenarios. We identify regimes in which it is preferable to fix the stoichiometry parameter, N, and evaluate the reliability of uncertainties provided by the least squares method.

resultsThe noise in the injection heat is mainly proportional in character, with ~1% and ~3% uncertainty at 27C and 65C, respectively; concentration errors are ~1%. Simulations of experiments based on these uncertainties delineate how experimental design and curve fitting methods influence the uncertainty in the final results.

conclusionsIn most cases, experimental uncertainty is minimized by using more injections and by fixing N at its known value. With appropriate technique, the uncertainty in measured binding enthalpies can be kept below ~2% under many conditions, including low C values. GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE: We quantify uncertainties in ITC data due to heat and concentration error, and identify practices to minimize these uncertainties. The resulting guidelines are important when ITC data are used quantitatively, such as to test computer simulations of binding. Reproducibility and further study are supported by free distribution of the new software developed here.

Indexed as

Biophysical PhenomenaCalorimetryHot TemperatureLeast-Squares AnalysisMonte Carlo MethodProtein BindingReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSoftwareThermodynamicsUncertaintyData analysisError evaluationError minimizationITC

Identifiers

PMID27599357
PMCPMC5195854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.