Cited by 101Computational Drug Discovery MethodsReceptor Mechanisms and SignalingProtein Structure and Dynamics

The role of protonation states in ligand-receptor recognition and binding.

Open access
Petukh, Marharyta, Stefl, Shannon, Alexov, Emil·2013·Current Pharmaceutical Design

Abstract

In this review we discuss the role of protonation states in receptor-ligand interactions, providing experimental evidences and computational predictions that complex formation may involve titratable groups with unusual pKa's and that protonation states frequently change from unbound to bound states. These protonation changes result in proton uptake/release, which in turn causes the pH-dependence of the binding. Indeed, experimental data strongly suggest that almost any binding is pH-dependent and to be correctly modeled, the protonation states must be properly assigned prior to and after the binding. One may accurately predict the protonation states when provided with the structures of the unbound proteins and their complex; however, the modeling becomes much more complicated if the bound state has to be predicted in a docking protocol or if the structures of either bound or unbound receptor-ligand are not available. The major challenges that arise in these situations are the coupling between binding and protonation states, and the conformational changes induced by the binding and ionization states of titratable groups. In addition, any assessment of the protonation state, either before or after binding, must refer to the pH of binding, which is frequently unknown. Thus, even if the pKa's of ionizable groups can be correctly assigned for both unbound and bound state, without knowing the experimental pH one cannot assign the corresponding protonation states, and consequently one cannot calculate the resulting proton uptake/release. It is pointed out, that while experimental pH may not be the physiological pH and binding may involve proton uptake/release, there is a tendency that the native receptor-ligand complexes have evolved toward specific either subcellular or tissue characteristic pH at which the proton uptake/release is either minimal or absent.

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 · 10.2174/1381612811319230004

Cites

124 of 124 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?

  • Correct assignment of protein and ligand protonation/tautomeric states with respect to experimental pH, Asn/Gln/His flips, and defined stereocenters is crucial and requires careful inspection of structures.

    “The correct assignment of both protein and ligand protonation/tautomeric states with respect to the experimental pH, Asn/Gln/His flips, and defined stereocenters of the compounds are crucial, requiring a careful inspection of the structures (Kalliokoski et al., 2009; Martin, 2009; Petukh et al., 2013; Sastry et al., 2013).”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [87]Mizutani MY Takamatsu Y Ichinose T Itai A Prediction of ligand binding affinity using a multiple-conformations-multiple-protonation scheme: application to estrogen receptor alpha Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo) 2012 60 183 94 22293477

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Petukh, M., Stefl, S., & Alexov, E.
Affiliations
Clemson University (US)
Corresponding author
Alexov, Emil
Venue
Current Pharmaceutical Design
Published
2013-05-01
Volume
19
Issue
23
Pages
4182-4190
ISSN
1381-6128 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2128629409
Cited by
101
References
124
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Pharmaceutical Design (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • TigerPrints (Clemson University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM093937)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Receptor Mechanisms and Signaling
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
protonation states, ligand-receptor interactions, pH-dependent binding, titratable groups, pKa prediction, ligand-receptor recognition, molecular docking, protein-ligand complex
MeSH terms
Ligands, Models, Molecular, Protein Binding, Protons, Receptors, Cell Surface

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