Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29435780›Full record

ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2018

Protein-ligand interfaces are polarized: discovery of a strong trend for intermolecular hydrogen bonds to favor donors on the protein side with implications for predicting and designing ligand complexes.

Sebastian Raschka, Alex J Wolf, Joseph Bemister-Buffington, Leslie A Kuhn

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2018. 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Conformational features and interaction mechanisms of VProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. DecipheringJournal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. International journal of biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

4 authors.

Sebastian RaschkaProtein Structural Analysis and Design Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1319, USA.
Alex J WolfProtein Structural Analysis and Design Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1319, USA.
Joseph Bemister-BuffingtonProtein Structural Analysis and Design Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1319, USA.
Leslie A KuhnProtein Structural Analysis and Design Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824-1319, USA. KuhnL@msu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9370-0978

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding how proteins encode ligand specificity is fascinating and similar in importance to deciphering the genetic code. For protein-ligand recognition, the combination of an almost infinite variety of interfacial shapes and patterns of chemical groups makes the problem especially challenging. Here we analyze data across non-homologous proteins in complex with small biological ligands to address observations made in our inhibitor discovery projects: that proteins favor donating H-bonds to ligands and avoid using groups with both H-bond donor and acceptor capacity. The resulting clear and significant chemical group matching preferences elucidate the code for protein-native ligand binding, similar to the dominant patterns found in nucleic acid base-pairing. On average, 90% of the keto and carboxylate oxygens occurring in the biological ligands formed direct H-bonds to the protein. A two-fold preference was found for protein atoms to act as H-bond donors and ligand atoms to act as acceptors, and 76% of all intermolecular H-bonds involved an amine donor. Together, the tight chemical and geometric constraints associated with satisfying donor groups generate a hydrogen-bonding lock that can be matched only by ligands bearing the right acceptor-rich key. Measuring an index of H-bond preference based on the observed chemical trends proved sufficient to predict other protein-ligand complexes and can be used to guide molecular design. The resulting Hbind and Protein Recognition Index software packages are being made available for rigorously defining intermolecular H-bonds and measuring the extent to which H-bonding patterns in a given complex match the preference key.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularAmino AcidsAmino Acid SequenceDatabases, ProteinDrug DesignHydrogen BondingHydrophobic and Hydrophilic InteractionsLigandsMolecular StructureProtein BindingProteinsSoftwareStructure-Activity RelationshipSurface PropertiesAmino AcidsLigandsProteinsDrug designInteraction patternsLigand optimizationLipinski’s Rule of 5Protein–ligand recognitionSpecificity determinants

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.