ArticlePLoS computational biology2024
Reliable ligand discrimination in stochastic multistep kinetic proofreading: First passage time vs. product counting strategies.
Article in PLoS computational biology, 2024. 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.
- Parallel reactions on a single T cell receptor offer a robust kinetic proofreading mechanism.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- FIRST PASSAGE TIMES TO T CELL ACTIVATION.ArXiv · 2025Article
- With the leisure of time, kinetic proofreading can still perform reliable ligand discrimination.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cellular signaling, crucial for biological processes like immune response and homeostasis, relies on specificity and fidelity in signal transduction to accurately respond to stimuli amidst biological noise. Kinetic proofreading (KPR) is a key mechanism enhancing signaling specificity through time-delayed steps, although its effectiveness is debated due to intrinsic noise potentially reducing signal fidelity. In this study, we reformulate the theory of kinetic proofreading (KPR) by convolving multiple intermediate states into a single state and then define an overall "processing" time required to traverse these states. This simplification allows us to succinctly describe kinetic proofreading in terms of a single waiting time parameter, facilitating a more direct evaluation and comparison of KPR performance across different biological contexts such as DNA replication and T cell receptor (TCR) signaling. We find that loss of fidelity for longer proofreading steps relies on the specific strategy of information extraction and show that in the first-passage time (FPT) discrimination strategy, longer proofreading steps can exponentially improve the accuracy of KPR at the cost of speed. Thus, KPR can still be an effective discrimination mechanism in the high noise regime. However, in a product concentration-based discrimination strategy, longer proofreading steps do not necessarily lead to an increase in performance. However, by introducing activation thresholds on product concentrations, can we decompose the product-based strategy into a series of FPT-based strategies to better resolve the subtleties of KPR-mediated product discrimination. Our findings underscore the importance of understanding KPR in the context of how information is extracted and processed in the cell.
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.