ArticleBiology2021
Insights into the Binding of Receptor-Binding Domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 Wild Type and B.1.620 Variant with hACE2 Using Molecular Docking and Simulation Approaches.
Article in Biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring the Structural and Functional Consequences of Deleterious Missense Nonsynonymous SNPs in theJournal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Identifying potential ligand molecules EGFR mediated TNBC targeting the kinase domain-identification of customized drugs throughResearch in pharmaceutical sciences · 2023Article
- The Development of Pharmacophore Models for the Search of New Natural Inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Spike RBD-ACE2 Binding Interface.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).Biology · 2022Article
- Methodology-Centered Review of Molecular Modeling, Simulation, and Prediction of SARS-CoV-2.Chemical reviews · 2022Review
- Pyrazolone-type compounds: synthesis andRSC advances · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, a new variant, B.1620, with mutations (S477N-E484K) in the spike protein's receptor-binding domain (RBD) has been reported in Europe. In order to design therapeutic strategies suitable for B.1.620, further studies are required. A detailed investigation of the structural features and variations caused by these substitutions, that is, a molecular level investigation, is essential to uncover the role of these changes. To determine whether and how the binding affinity of ACE2-RBD is affected, we used protein-protein docking and all-atom simulation approaches. Our analysis revealed that B.1.620 binds more strongly than the wild type and alters the hydrogen bonding network. The docking score for the wild type was reported to be -122.6 +/- 0.7 kcal/mol, while for B.1.620, the docking score was -124.9 +/- 3.8 kcal/mol. A comparative binding investigation showed that the wild-type complex has 11 hydrogen bonds and one salt bridge, while the B.1.620 complex has 14 hydrogen bonds and one salt bridge, among which most of the interactions are preserved between the wild type and B.1.620. A dynamic analysis of the two complexes revealed stable dynamics, which corroborated the global stability trend, compactness, and flexibility of the three essential loops, providing a better conformational optimization opportunity and binding. Furthermore, binding free energy revealed that the wild type had a total binding energy of -51.14 kcal/mol, while for B.1.628, the total binding energy was -68.25 kcal/mol. The current findings based on protein complex modeling and bio-simulation methods revealed the atomic features of the B.1.620 variant harboring S477N and E484K mutations in the RBD and the basis for infectivity. In conclusion, the current study presents distinguishing features of B.1.620, which can be used to design structure-based drugs against the B.1.620 variant.
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.