The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the Meaning of Affinity: Cluster Glycoside Effects and Concanavalin A
Abstract
The inhibition of protein−carbohydrate interaction provides a powerful therapeutic strategy for the treatment of myriad human diseases. To date, application of such approaches have been frustrated by the inherent low affinity of carbohydrate ligands for their protein receptors. Because lectins typically exist in multimeric assemblies, a variety of polyvalent saccharide ligands have been prepared in the search for high affinity. The cluster glycoside effect, or the observation of high affinity derived from multivalency in oligosaccharide ligands, apparently represents the best strategy for overcoming the “weak binding” problem. Here we report the synthesis of a series of multivalent dendritic saccharides and a biophysical evaluation of their interaction with the plant lectin concanavalin A. Although a 30-fold enhancement in affinity on a valence-corrected basis is observed by agglutination assay, calorimetric titration of soluble protein with a range of multivalent ligands reveals no enhancement in binding free energies. Rather, IC 50 values from agglutination measurements correlate well with entropies of binding. This observation suggests that hemagglutination measures a phenomenon distinct from binding that is typified by a large favorable entropy and an unfavorable enthalpy: this process is almost certainly aggregation. Supporting this assertion, we report crystal structures of multivalent ligands cross-linking concanavalin A dimers. To the best of our knowledge, these structures are the first reported of their kind. Our results indicate that hemagglutination assays evaluate the ability of ligands to inhibit the formation of cross-linked lattices, a process only tangentially related to reversible ligand binding. Cluster glycoside effects observed in agglutination assays must, therefore, be viewed with caution. Such effects may or may not be relevant to the design of therapeutically useful saccharides.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Colorimetric Method for Determination of Sugars and Related Substances
DuBois, M., Gilles, K. A., Hamilton, J. K., Rebers, P. A., & Smith, F. (1956) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac60111a017 · Cited by 52,269
Cited by
Isikgor, F. H., & Becer, C. R. (2015) · Polymer Chemistry · doi:10.1039/c5py00263j · Cited by 2,775
Ladmiral, V., Mantovani, G., Clarkson, G. J., Cauet, S., Irwin, J. L., & Haddleton, D. M. (2006) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja058364k · Cited by 586
Cu(I)-Catalyzed Click Chemistry in Glycoscience and Their Diverse Applications
Agrahari, A. K., Bose, P., Jaiswal, M. K., Rajkhowa, S., Singh, A. S., Hotha, S., Mishra, N., & Tiwari, V. K. (2021) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00920 · Cited by 445
Burattini, S., Greenland, B. W., Hayes, W., Mackay, M. E., Rowan, S. J., & Colquhoun, H. M. (2011) · Chemistry of Materials · doi:10.1021/cm102963k · Cited by 256
Metadata
- Authors
- Dimick, S. M., Powell, S. C., McMahon, S. A., Moothoo, D. N., Naismith, J. H., & Toone, E. J.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Chemical Society
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 1999-10-14
- Volume
- 121
- Issue
- 44
- Pages
- 10286-10296
- ISSN
- 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5126
- OpenAlex
- W2024274577
- Cited by
- 240
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.