ArticleProteins2025
Using Short Molecular Dynamics Simulations to Determine the Important Features of Interactions in Antibody-Protein Complexes.
Article in Proteins, 2025. 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.
- Efficacy of tannins as silage additives to inhibit deamination process during ensiling: a meta-analysis andVeterinary and animal science · 2026Article
- Role of tannin, saponin, and cumin in inhibiting deamination during ensiling: A molecular docking and molecular dynamics approach.Open veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Functional Design and Biophysical Characterization of Analyte-Responsive Polymers.Biomacromolecules · 2025Article
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
Abstract
The last few years have seen the rapid proliferation of machine learning methods to design binding proteins. Although these methods have shown large increases in experimental success rates compared to prior approaches, the majority of their predictions fail when they are experimentally tested. It is evident that computational methods still struggle to distinguish the features of real protein binding interfaces from false predictions. Short molecular dynamics simulations of 20 antibody-protein complexes were conducted to identify features of interactions that should occur in binding interfaces. Intermolecular salt bridges, hydrogen bonds, and hydrophobic interactions were evaluated for their persistences, energies, and stabilities during the simulations. It was found that only the hydrogen bonds where both residues are stabilized in the bound complex are expected to persist and meaningfully contribute to binding between the proteins. In contrast, stabilization was not a requirement for salt bridges and hydrophobic interactions to persist. Still, interactions where both residues are stabilized in the bound complex persist significantly longer and have significantly stronger energies than other interactions. Two hundred and twenty real antibody-protein complexes and 8194 decoy complexes were used to train and test a random forest classifier using the features of expected persistent interactions identified in this study and the macromolecular features of interaction energy (IE), buried surface area (BSA), IE/BSA, and shape complementarity. It was compared to a classifier trained only on the expected persistent interaction features and another trained only on the macromolecular features. Inclusion of the expected persistent interaction features reduced the false positive rate of the classifier by two- to five-fold across a range of true positive classification rates.
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.