ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2026
Combining AI Structure Prediction and Integrative Modeling for Nanobody-Antigen Complexes.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cell-Based Immunization Combined with Single-Round Cell Panning Enables Discovery of PSMA-Targeting Nanobodies from Phage Display Libraries.Biomolecules · 2026Article
- Assessing structural prediction accuracy for nanobody-small molecule complexes.Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nanobodies exhibit antigen-binding affinities of the same order as those of antibodies, which, along with their small size and unique structural characteristics, makes them well-suited for therapeutic and diagnostic applications. The lack of coevolutionary signals in nanobody-antigen complexes, together with the broad complementarity determining region 3 loop (CDR3) conformational space, poses a challenge for predicting the 3D structure of those complexes with computational modeling and artificial intelligence-based methods. In this context, physics-based information-driven docking can provide an alternative solution. This study evaluates the state-of-the-art machine-learning-based methods for nanobody structure prediction and benchmarks various HADDOCK workflows to model their interaction with antigens using different input nanobody ensembles and information scenarios. We propose an ensemble docking pipeline that achieves high success rates starting from nanobody structural models predicted by AlphaFold2 and ImmuneBuilder. Provided that some information on the epitope is available, our pipeline achieves higher success rates than the AlphaFold baseline on all generated models.
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.