Markov models of the apo-MDM2 lid region reveal diffuse yet two-state binding dynamics and receptor poses for computational docking
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
MDM2 is a negative regulator of p53 activity and an important target for cancer therapeutics. The N-terminal lid region of MDM2 modulates interactions with p53 via competition for its binding cleft, exchanging slowly between docked and undocked conformations in the absence of p53. To better understand these dynamics, we constructed Markov State Models (MSMs) from large collections of unbiased simulation trajectories of apo -MDM2, and find strong evidence for diffuse, yet two-state folding and binding of the N-terminal region to the p53 receptor site. The MSM also identifies holo -like receptor conformations highly suitable for computational docking, despite initiating trajectories from closed-cleft receptor structures unsuitable for docking. Fixed-anchor docking studies using a test set of high-affinity small molecules and peptides show simulated receptor ensembles achieve docking successes comparable to cross-docking studies using crystal structures of receptors bound by alternative ligands. For p53, the best-scoring receptor structures have the N-terminal region lid region bound in a helical conformation mimicking the bound structure of p53, suggesting lid region association induces receptor conformations suitable for binding. These results suggest that MD + MSM approaches can sample binding-competent receptor conformations suitable for computational peptidomimetic design, and that inclusion of disordered regions may be essential to capturing the correct receptor dynamics.
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
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.
Cites
Markov state models of biomolecular conformational dynamics
Chodera, J. D., & Noé, F. (2014) · Current Opinion in Structural Biology · doi:10.1016/j.sbi.2014.04.002 · Cited by 776 · see citing works
Structural basis for high-affinity peptide inhibition of p53 interactions with MDM2 and MDMX
Pazgier, M., Liu, M., Zou, G., Yuan, W., Li, C., Li, C., Li, J., Monbo, J., Zella, D., Tarasov, S. G., et al. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0900947106 · Cited by 391 · see citing works
Variational approach to molecular kinetics
Nüske, F., Keller, B. G., Pérez-Hernández, G., Mey, A. S. J. S., & Noé, F. (2014) · Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation · doi:10.1021/ct4009156 · Cited by 308 · see citing works
Qiao, Q., Bowman, G. R., & Huang, X. (2013) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja403147m · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Fischer, M., Coleman, R. G., Fraser, J. S., & Shoichet, B. K. (2014) · Nature Chemistry · doi:10.1038/nchem.1954 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
A Left‐Handed Solution to Peptide Inhibition of the p53–MDM2 Interaction
Liu, M., Pazgier, M., Li, C., Yuan, W., Li, C., & Lu, W. (2010) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201000329 · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Lin, Y.-S., Bowman, G. R., Beauchamp, K. A., & Pande, V. S. (2012) · Biophysical Journal · doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2011.12.002 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Bowman, G. R. (2012) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.4755751 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Mukherjee, S., Pantelopulos, G. A., & Voelz, V. A.
- Affiliations
- Temple University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Voelz, Vincent A.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2016-08-19
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31631-31631
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4990920
- OpenAlex
- W2950506427
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 1.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- TUScholarShare (Temple University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1545957, 0958854, 1412508)
- Temple University
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related Molecular Pathways
- Keywords
- MDM2, p53, Markov state models, protein conformational dynamics, two-state folding, protein-ligand binding, computational docking, receptor conformation, intrinsically disordered regions, cancer therapeutics
- MeSH terms
- Protein Domains, Humans, Markov Chains, Tumor Suppressor Protein p53, Protein Folding, Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-mdm2, Molecular Docking 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