PreprintCited by 18Protein Structure and DynamicsComputational Drug Discovery MethodsChemical Synthesis and Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

High-throughput discovery of inhibitory protein fragments with AlphaFold

Open access
Savinov, Andrew, Swanson, Sebastian, Keating, Amy E., Li, Gene-Wei·2023·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Preprint — published as 10.1073/pnas.2322412122 · Paper page

Abstract

Peptides can bind to specific sites on larger proteins and thereby function as inhibitors and regulatory elements. Peptide fragments of larger proteins are particularly attractive for achieving these functions due to their inherent potential to form native-like binding interactions. Recently developed experimental approaches allow for high-throughput measurement of protein fragment inhibitory activity in living cells. However, it has thus far not been possible to predict de novo which of the many possible protein fragments bind to protein targets, let alone act as inhibitors. We have developed a computational method, FragFold, that employs AlphaFold to predict protein fragment binding to full-length proteins in a high-throughput manner. Applying FragFold to thousands of fragments tiling across diverse proteins revealed peaks of predicted binding along each protein sequence. Comparisons with experimental measurements establish that our approach is a sensitive predictor of fragment function: Evaluating inhibitory fragments from known protein-protein interaction interfaces, we find 87% are predicted by FragFold to bind in a native-like mode. Across full protein sequences, 68% of FragFold-predicted binding peaks match experimentally measured inhibitory peaks. Deep mutational scanning experiments support the predicted binding modes and uncover superior inhibitory peptides in high throughput. Further, FragFold is able to predict previously unknown protein binding modes, explaining prior genetic and biochemical data. The success rate of FragFold demonstrates that this computational approach should be broadly applicable for discovering inhibitory protein fragments across proteomes. Significance Statement: Peptides can regulate protein interactions by binding to specific interfaces, and fragments of larger proteins have high potential to function in this manner. Recently developed experimental methods allow massively parallel measurement of protein fragment-based inhibition in vivo . However, we have lacked comparable computational methods to predict which protein fragments act as inhibitors and how they bind. Here we report a new approach, FragFold, which leverages high-throughput AlphaFold predictions of protein – fragment binding to tackle these problems at scale. FragFold is successful at predicting inhibitory protein fragments and their binding modes across diverse protein structures and functions. This new approach stands to enable proteome-wide discovery of inhibitory protein fragments and aid the interpretation of high-throughput experimental measurements of inhibitory activity. Classification: Biological Sciences / Biophysics and Computational Biology

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2023.12.19.572389

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 73

  1. 10.1146/annurev-biochem-070611-102400 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1128/ecosalplus.ESP-0031–2019 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1126/science.aay0262 · DOI
  4. 2023, Shining a light on the dark proteome: Non-canonical open reading frames and their encoded miniproteins as a new frontier in cancer biology, Protein Science, 32, e4708, 10.1002/pro.4708 · DOI
  5. 10.1038/nature22970 · DOI
  6. 10.1126/science.aay0967 · DOI
  7. 10.1038/nature13205 · DOI
  8. 10.1073/pnas.1210093109 · DOI
  9. 2015, The Escherichia coli Small Protein MntS and Exporter MntP Optimize the Intracellular Concentration of Manganese, PLOS Genetics, 11, e1004977, 10.1371/journal.pgen.1004977 · DOI
  10. 10.1073/pnas.2307382120 · DOI
  11. 10.1128/mbio.00837-19 · DOI
  12. 10.7554/eLife.78299 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1038/s41559-023-02224-4 · DOI
  14. 10.1038/s41586-018-0830-7 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 2019, Peptide Design Principles for Antimicrobial Applications, Journal of Molecular Biology, 431, 3547, 10.1016/j.jmb.2018.12.015 · DOI
  16. 10.1038/nature23912 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1038/s41592-019-0368-0 · DOI
  18. 2021, Peptide-tiling screens of cancer drivers reveal oncogenic protein domains and associated peptide inhibitors, Cell Systems, 12, 716, 10.1016/j.cels.2021.05.002 · DOI
  19. 2021, Seeds of their own destruction: Dominant-negative peptide screening yields functional insight and therapeutic leads, Cell Systems, 12, 691, 10.1016/j.cels.2021.06.003 · DOI
  20. 2022, Mapping functional regions of essential bacterial proteins with dominant-negative protein fragments, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119, e2200124119, 10.1073/pnas.2200124119 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1093/nar/28.1.235 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1073/pnas.1111471108 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1038/s41467-021-27838-9 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 2023, Ranking Peptide Binders by Affinity with AlphaFold, Angewandte Chemie, 135, e202213362, 10.1002/ange.202213362 · DOI
  25. 2023, Peptide-binding specificity prediction using fine-tuned protein structure prediction networks, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 120, e2216697120, 10.1073/pnas.2216697120 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1038/s41467-023-38328-5 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 2021, Highly accurate protein structure prediction for the human proteome, Nature, 596, 590, 10.1038/s41586-021-03828-1 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1038/S41592-022-01488-1 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1101/2021.10.04.463034 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 2021, Computed structures of core eukaryotic protein complexes, Science, 374, eabm4805, 10.1126/science.abm4805 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 2020, High-resolution crystal structures of Escherichia coli FtsZ bound to GDP and GTP, Acta Cryst F, 76, 94, 10.1107/S2053230X20001132 · DOI
  32. 10.1038/nbt1096-1246 · DOI
  33. 10.1146/annurev.biochem.67.1.509 · DOI
  34. 10.1111/mmi.12279 · DOI
  35. 10.1111/mmi.12272 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.jmb.2020.03.008 · DOI
  37. 10.1073/pnas.2211178119 · DOI
  38. 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2007.05735.x · DOI
  39. 10.1111/mmi.13902 · DOI
  40. 10.1093/emboj/19.13.3179 · DOI
  41. 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2009.06651.x · DOI
  42. 10.1074/jbc.M117.815894 · DOI
  43. 10.1128/jb.00374-18 · DOI
  44. 2020, PepPro: A Nonredundant Structure Data Set for Benchmarking Peptide– Protein Computational Docking, Journal of Computational Chemistry, 41, 362, 10.1002/jcc.26114 · DOI
  45. 10.1093/nar/gkw385 · DOI
  46. 10.1038/s41592-020-0848-2 · DOI · Paper page
  47. 10.1111/mmi.12854 · DOI
  48. 10.1093/nar/gkab1006 · DOI · Paper page
  49. 10.1093/NAR/GKAC1000 · DOI · Paper page
  50. 10.1002/PRO.3978 · DOI · Paper page
  51. 10.1101/2023.08.07.552219 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 2023, AlphaPulldown—a python package for protein–protein interaction screens using AlphaFold-Multimer, Bioinformatics, 39, btac749, 10.1093/bioinformatics/btac749 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.1101/2021.07.27.453972 · DOI · Paper page
  54. 2022, Improved prediction of protein-protein interactions using AlphaFold2, Nat Commun, 13, 1265, 10.1038/s41467-022-28865-w · DOI · Paper page
  55. H. Bret , J. Andreani , R. Guerois , From interaction networks to interfaces: Scanning intrinsically disordered regions using AlphaFold2. [Preprint] (2023). Available at: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.05.25.542287v1 [Accessed 3 October 2023]. · DOI · Paper page
  56. A. Mondal , et al., Sifting Through the Noise: A Computational Pipeline for Accurate Prioritization of Protein-Protein Binding Candidates in High-Throughput Protein Libraries. [Preprint] (2024). Available at: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576374v1 [Accessed 30 July 2024]. · DOI
  57. 2004, Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 57, 702, 10.1002/prot.20264 · DOI · Paper page
  58. 2023, Protein complexes in cells by AI-assisted structural proteomics, Molecular Systems Biology, 19, e11544, 10.15252/msb.202311544 · DOI
  59. 10.1038/nmeth.2918 · DOI · Paper page
  60. 10.1038/s41570-022-00456-9 · DOI
  61. 10.7554/eLife.40499 · DOI
  62. 2022, A bead-based method for high-throughput mapping of the sequence- and force-dependence of T cell activation, Nat Methods, 19, 1295, 10.1038/s41592-022-01592-2 · DOI
  63. 10.1101/2022.09.26.509383 · DOI
  64. 2023, Mega-scale experimental analysis of protein folding stability in biology and design, Nature, 620, 434, 10.1038/s41586-023-06328-6 · DOI · Paper page
  65. 10.1016/j.molcel.2019.02.019 · DOI
  66. 2022, Direct activation of a bacterial innate immune system by a viral capsid protein, Nature, 612, 132, 10.1038/s41586-022-05444-z · DOI
  67. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty1057 · DOI · Paper page
  68. 10.1023/A:1019154432472 · DOI
  69. 10.1073/pnas.1115898108 · DOI
  70. 2021, Perturbing the energy landscape for improved packing during computational protein design, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, 89, 436, 10.1002/prot.26030 · DOI · Paper page
  71. 10.1002/pro.2187 · DOI
  72. 10.1371/journal.pone.0063906 · DOI
  73. A. Reuther , et al., Interactive Supercomputing on 40,000 Cores for Machine Learning and Data Analysis in 2018 IEEE High Performance Extreme Computing Conference (HPEC), (2018), pp. 1–6. · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Savinov, A., Swanson, S., Keating, A. E., & Li, G.-W.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research At MIT (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
  • Savinov, Andrew
  • Swanson, Sebastian
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2023-12-20
Volume
122
Issue
6
Pages
e2322412122-e2322412122
ISSN
0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4407096199
Cited by
18
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 2
FWCI
4.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (F32GM134557, K99GM148718, R35GM124732, R35GM149227)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Drug Discovery › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Organic Chemistry › Chemical Synthesis and Analysis
Keywords
peptide fragments, AlphaFold, protein-protein interfaces, deep mutational scanning, fragment-based drug discovery, binding mode prediction

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