PreprintCited by 13Protease and Inhibitor MechanismsComputational Drug Discovery MethodsMachine Learning in Bioinformatics

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

Deep learning guided design of protease substrates

Open access

Preprint — published as 10.1038/s41467-025-67226-1 · Paper page

Abstract

Proteases, a class of enzymes that play critical roles in health and disease, exert their function through the cleavage of peptide bonds. Identifying substrates that are efficiently and selectively cleaved by target proteases is essential for studying protease activity and for harnessing their activity in protease-activated diagnostics and therapeutics. However, the vast design space of possible substrates (c.a. 20 10 unique amino acid combinations for a 10-mer peptide) and the limited accessibility of high-throughput activity profiling tools hinder the speed and success of substrate design. We present CleaveNet, an end-to-end AI pipeline for the design of protease substrates. Applied to matrix metalloproteinases, CleaveNet enhances the scale, tunability, and efficiency of substrate design. CleaveNet generates peptide substrates that exhibit sound biophysical properties and capture not only well-established but also novel cleavage motifs. To enable precise control over substrate design, CleaveNet incorporates a conditioning tag that enables generation of peptides guided by a target cleavage profile, enabling targeted design of efficient and selective substrates. CleaveNet-generated substrates were validated experimentally through a large-scale in vitro screen, even in the challenging case of designing highly selective substrates for MMP13. We envision that CleaveNet will accelerate our ability to study and capitalize on protease activity, paving the way for new in silico design tools across enzyme classes.

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 · 10.1101/2025.02.27.640681

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: 59

  1. 10.1074/jbc.R800035200 · DOI
  2. 10.3390/ijms21249739 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1146/annurev-cancerbio-030617-050549 · DOI
  4. 10.1038/nchembio707 · DOI
  5. 10.1038/nmeth.2182 · DOI
  6. 10.1073/pnas.94.13.6629 · DOI
  7. 10.1042/bj20021643 · DOI
  8. 10.1111/febs.15227 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.molmed.2020.01.013 · DOI
  10. 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.1075 · DOI
  11. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaw0262 · DOI
  12. 10.1080/14712598.2020.1699053 · DOI
  13. 10.1158/1538-7445.AM2021-933 · DOI
  14. 10.1021/acsnano.2c04162 · DOI
  15. 15. Q. Zhong , et al., bioRxiv (2024). Conditional fusogenic lipid nanocarriers for cytosolic delivery of macromolecular therapeutics. · DOI
  16. 10.1385/MB:22:1:051 · DOI
  17. 10.1074/jbc.M513331200 · DOI
  18. 10.1021/bc9002019 · DOI
  19. 10.1111/febs.14001 · DOI
  20. 10.1038/nrd2092 · DOI
  21. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003007 · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2012.08.015 · DOI
  23. 10.1038/s41467-020-16838-w · DOI
  24. 10.1038/cdd.2014.64 · DOI
  25. 10.1515/hsz-2019-0332 · DOI
  26. 10.1073/pnas.2009279117 · DOI
  27. 10.1371/journal.pone.0037441 · DOI
  28. E. L. Schneider , C. S. Craik , Proteases and Cancer: Methods and Protocols pp. 59–78 (2009). Positional scanning synthetic combinatorial libraries for substrate profiling. · DOI
  29. 10.1142/S021972000500117X · DOI
  30. 10.1186/1471-2105-13-1 · DOI
  31. 31. T. Lohmüller, et al. (2003). Toward computer-based cleavage site prediction of cysteine endopeptidases. · DOI
  32. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz721 · DOI
  33. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx670 · DOI
  34. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq043 · DOI
  35. 10.1016/J.GPB.2019.08.002 · DOI
  36. 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012061 · DOI
  37. 10.1038/s41586-023-06415-8 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 10.1038/s41586-023-05696-3 · DOI
  39. S. Alamdari , et al., bioRxiv (2024). Protein generation with evolutionary diffusion: sequence is all you need. · DOI · Paper page
  40. 10.1093/nsr/nwad331 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.3389/fonc.2019.01370 · DOI
  42. 10.1016/j.chembiol.2015.07.008 · DOI
  43. 10.3390/ijms22041742 · DOI
  44. 10.2353/ajpath.2009.081080 · DOI
  45. 1997, Schmidhuber, Neural Computation, Long short-term memory, 9, 1735
  46. A. Vaswani , et al., Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (2017). Attention is all you need.
  47. 10.1126/science.ade2574 · DOI · Paper page
  48. 10.1038/s41587-022-01618-2 · DOI · Paper page
  49. 10.1021/acsomega.2c01559 · DOI
  50. 10.1038/nmeth1109-786 · DOI
  51. 10.1016/j.dib.2016.02.036 · DOI
  52. 10.1073/pnas.1406134111 · DOI
  53. 10.1021/pr0340476 · DOI
  54. 10.1038/s41586-021-03828-1 · DOI · Paper page
  55. 10.1021/bc800117r · DOI
  56. 10.7150/thno.13826 · DOI
  57. 2020, Nature Communications, Protease circuits for processing biological information, 11, 5021
  58. A. Sivakumar , et al., Nature Nanotechnology pp. 1–10 (2025). AND-gated proteaseactivated nanosensors for programmable detection of anti-tumour immunity.
  59. B. Lakshminarayanan , A. Pritzel , C. Blundell , Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (2017). Simple and scalable predictive uncertainty estimation using deep ensembles.

Metadata

Authors
Martin-Alonso, C., Alamdari, S., Samad, T. S., Yang, K. K., Bhatia, S. N., & Amini, A. P.
Affiliations
  • Harvard–MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology (US)
  • Microsoft Research New England (United States) (US)
  • Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research At MIT (US)
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Microsoft (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
  • Bhatia, Sangeeta N.
  • Amini, Ava P.
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2025-03-02
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
54-54
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7119034859
Cited by
13
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 1
FWCI
37.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • Virginia and D.K. Ludwig Fund for Cancer Research
  • “la Caixa” Foundation (100010434)
  • Broad Institute
  • Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Ludwig Center at Harvard
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Protease and Inhibitor Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Drug Discovery › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
Keywords
matrix metalloproteinases, MMP-13, peptide production, deep learning
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Humans, Peptide Hydrolases, Peptides, Substrate Specificity, Matrix Metalloproteinase 13, Proteolysis

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