ArticleJournal of molecular modeling2022
A comparative study of receptor interactions between SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 from molecular modeling.
Article in Journal of molecular modeling, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biophysics of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein's receptor-binding domain interaction with ACE2 and neutralizing antibodies: from computation to functional insights.Biophysical reviews · 2025Review
- Binding affinity between coronavirus spike protein and human ACE2 receptor.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Transformation of peptides to small molecules in medicinal chemistry: Challenges and opportunities.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2024Review
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 at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The pandemic of COVID-19 severe acute respiratory syndrome, which was fatal for millions of people worldwide, triggered the race to understand in detail the molecular mechanisms of this disease. In this work, the differences of interactions between the SARS-CoV/SARS-CoV-2 Receptor binding domain (RBD) and the human Angiotensin Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor were studied using in silico tools. Our results show that SARS-CoV-2 RBD is more stable and forms more interactions with ACE2 than SARS-CoV. At its interface, three stable binding patterns are observed and named red-K31, green-K353 and blue-M82 according to the central ACE2 binding residue. In SARS-CoV instead, only the first two binding patches are persistently formed during the MD simulation. Our MM/GBSA calculations indicate the binding free energy difference of about 2.5 kcal/mol between SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV which is compatible with the experiments. The binding free energy decomposition points out that SARS-CoV-2 RBD-ACE2 interactions of the red-K31 ([Formula: see text]) and blue-M82 ([Formula: see text]) patterns contribute more to the binding affinity than in SARS-CoV ([Formula: see text] for red-K31), while the contribution of the green-K353 pattern is very similar in the two strains ([Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] for SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV, respectively). Five groups of mutations draw our attention at the RBD-ACE2 binding interface, among them, the mutation -PPA469-471/GVEG482-485 has the most important and favorable impact on SARS-CoV-2 binding to the ACE2 receptor. These results, highlighting the molecular differences in the binding between the two viruses, contribute to the common knowledge about the new corona virus and to the development of appropriate antiviral treatments, addressing the necessity of ongoing pandemics.
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.