ArticlePLoS computational biology2022
From complete cross-docking to partners identification and binding sites predictions.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reproducibility, validation, and failure modes across classical and AI-driven molecular docking.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2026Review
- Assessing the functional impact of protein binding site definition.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2024Article
- Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to Expedite Antibody Design and Enhance Antibody-Antigen Interactions.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Soft disorder modulates the assembly path of protein complexes.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Deep Local Analysis evaluates protein docking conformations with locally oriented cubes.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Protein-Protein Interaction Prediction for Targeted Protein Degradation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Topsy-Turvy: integrating a global view into sequence-based PPI prediction.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Proteins ensure their biological functions by interacting with each other. Hence, characterising protein interactions is fundamental for our understanding of the cellular machinery, and for improving medicine and bioengineering. Over the past years, a large body of experimental data has been accumulated on who interacts with whom and in what manner. However, these data are highly heterogeneous and sometimes contradictory, noisy, and biased. Ab initio methods provide a means to a "blind" protein-protein interaction network reconstruction. Here, we report on a molecular cross-docking-based approach for the identification of protein partners. The docking algorithm uses a coarse-grained representation of the protein structures and treats them as rigid bodies. We applied the approach to a few hundred of proteins, in the unbound conformations, and we systematically investigated the influence of several key ingredients, such as the size and quality of the interfaces, and the scoring function. We achieved some significant improvement compared to previous works, and a very high discriminative power on some specific functional classes. We provide a readout of the contributions of shape and physico-chemical complementarity, interface matching, and specificity, in the predictions. In addition, we assessed the ability of the approach to account for protein surface multiple usages, and we compared it with a sequence-based deep learning method. This work may contribute to guiding the exploitation of the large amounts of protein structural models now available toward the discovery of unexpected partners and their complex structure characterisation.
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.