Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34209788›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Does the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Receptor Binding Domain Interact Effectively with the DPP4 (CD26) Receptor? A Molecular Docking Study.

Kirsten Cameron, Lina Rozano, Marco Falasca, Ricardo L Mancera

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. SARS-CoV-2 cell entry beyond the ACE2 receptor.Molecular biology reports · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Rebound increase in circulating dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) enzyme activity after acute COVID-19.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Kirsten CameronSchool of Molecular and Life Sciences, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
Lina RozanoCurtin Medical School, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute and Curtin Institute for Computation, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
Marco FalascaCurtin Medical School, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute and Curtin Institute for Computation, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9801-7235
Ricardo L ManceraCurtin Medical School, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute and Curtin Institute for Computation, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9191-5622
Curtin University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

ACE2 has been established as the main receptor for SARS-CoV-2. Since other human coronaviruses are known to use co-receptors for viral cell entry, it has been suggested that DPP4 (CD26) could be a potential additional binding target or co-receptor, supported by early molecular docking simulation studies. However, recent biophysical studies have shown this interaction to be very weak. We have conducted detailed molecular docking simulations to predict the potential binding interactions between the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 and DPP4 and compare them with the interactions observed in the experimentally determined structure of the complex of MERS-CoV with DPP4. Whilst the overall binding mode of the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 to DPP4 is predicted to be similar to that observed in the MERS-CoV-DPP4 complex, including a number of equivalent interactions, important differences in the amino acid sequences of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV result in substantially weakened interactions with DPP4. This is shown to arise from differences in the predicted proximity, nature and secondary structure at the binding interface on the RBD of SARS-CoV-2. These findings do not support DPP4 being a significant receptor for SARS-CoV-2.

Indexed as

Molecular Docking SimulationAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2Binding SitesCOVID-19Crystallography, X-RayDipeptidyl Peptidase 4HumansProtein BindingProtein DomainsSARS-CoV-2Spike Glycoprotein, CoronavirusThermodynamicsAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4DPP4 protein, humanSpike Glycoprotein, Coronavirusspike protein, SARS-CoV-2COVID-19DPP4molecular interactionsreceptor binding domainSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID34209788
PMCPMC8269389
OpenAlexW3174037491

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.