ArticleThe Biochemical journal2020
Quantitative mapping of binding specificity landscapes for homologous targets by using a high-throughput method.
Article in The Biochemical journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine-learning prediction of affinity and epistasis in the bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor-chymotrypsin complex.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2026Article
- Modifying inhibitor specificity for homologous enzymes by machine learning.The FEBS journal · 2026Article
- Mapping the sclerostin-LRP4 binding interface identifies critical interaction hotspots in loops 1 and 3 of sclerostin.FEBS letters · 2025Article
- Deep neural networks for predicting the affinity landscape of protein-protein interactions.iScience · 2024Article
- Protein engineering via sequence-performance mapping.Cell systems · 2023Review
- Structure and computation-guided yeast surface display for the evolution of TIMP-based matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Review
- RNase H-dependent PCR enables highly specific amplification of antibody variable domains from single B-cells.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
To facilitate investigations of protein-protein interactions (PPIs), we developed a novel platform for quantitative mapping of protein binding specificity landscapes, which combines the multi-target screening of a mutagenesis library into high- and low-affinity populations with sophisticated next-generation sequencing analysis. Importantly, this method generates accurate models to predict affinity and specificity values for any mutation within a protein complex, and requires only a few experimental binding affinity measurements using purified proteins for calibration. We demonstrated the utility of the approach by mapping quantitative landscapes for interactions between the N-terminal domain of the tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 2 (N-TIMP2) and three matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) having homologous structures but different affinities (MMP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-14). The binding landscapes for N-TIMP2/MMP-1 and N-TIMP2/MMP-3 showed the PPIs to be almost fully optimized, with most single mutations giving a loss of affinity. In contrast, the non-optimized PPI for N-TIMP2/MMP-14 was reflected in a wide range of binding affinities, where single mutations exhibited a far more attenuated effect on the PPI. Our new platform reliably and comprehensively identified not only hot- and cold-spot residues, but also specificity-switch mutations that shape target affinity and specificity. Thus, our approach provides a methodology giving an unprecedentedly rich quantitative analysis of the binding specificity landscape, which will broaden the understanding of the mechanisms and evolutionary origins of specific PPIs and facilitate the rational design of specific inhibitors for structurally similar target proteins.
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.