Cited by 156Computational Drug Discovery MethodsProtein Structure and DynamicsReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling

Exploring the role of receptor flexibility in structure-based drug discovery

Open access
Feixas, Ferran, Lindert, Steffen, Sinko, William, McCammon, J. Andrew·2014·Biophysical Chemistry

Abstract

The proper understanding of biomolecular recognition mechanisms that take place in a drug target is of paramount importance to improve the efficiency of drug discovery and development. The intrinsic dynamic character of proteins has a strong influence on biomolecular recognition mechanisms and models such as conformational selection have been widely used to account for this dynamic association process. However, conformational changes occurring in the receptor prior and upon association with other molecules are diverse and not obvious to predict when only a few structures of the receptor are available. In view of the prominent role of protein flexibility in ligand binding and its implications for drug discovery, it is of great interest to identify receptor conformations that play a major role in biomolecular recognition before starting rational drug design efforts. In this review, we discuss a number of recent advances in computer-aided drug discovery techniques that have been proposed to incorporate receptor flexibility into structure-based drug design. The allowance for receptor flexibility provided by computational techniques such as molecular dynamics simulations or enhanced sampling techniques helps to improve the accuracy of methods used to estimate binding affinities and, thus, such methods can contribute to the discovery of novel drug leads.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bpc.2013.10.007

Cites

157 of 157 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Early computational approaches suffered limitations from the use of apo template structures for homology modeling and from neglecting the ligand induced fit effect on the protein conformation.

    “However, these early computational approaches suffered from several known limitations given by the use of apo template structures for homology modeling and the neglecting of the ligand induced fit effect on the protein conformation22,23.”

    From Modeling the binding of diverse ligands within the Ah receptor ligand binding domain (2019) · cites this paper as [23]

    The section “Accounting for Receptor Flexibility in the Estimation of Binding Affinities” (page unavailable) says docking often uses a rigid receptor and describes induced-fit docking as a way to account for ligand-associated rearrangements. That supports the limitation concerning neglected receptor flexibility. The passages found do not identify the use of apo templates for homology modeling as a limitation of early approaches. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Feixas, F., Lindert, S., Sinko, W., & McCammon, J. A.
Affiliations
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • U.S. National Science Foundation (US)
Corresponding author
Feixas, Ferran
Venue
Biophysical Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-02
Volume
186
Pages
31-45
ISSN
0301-4622 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2022849573
Cited by
156
References
157
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 6
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biophysical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM031749)
  • National Center for Research Resources (P41RR006009)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Receptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Keywords
receptor flexibility, protein dynamics, structure-based drug design, conformational selection, biomolecular recognition, ligand binding affinity, molecular dynamics simulation, enhanced sampling, binding affinity prediction
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Protein Binding, Protein Conformation, Proteins, Drug Design, Computer-Aided Design, Molecular Dynamics Simulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review