# Quantitative Characterization of the Impact of Protein–Protein Interactions on Ligand–Protein Binding: A Multi-Chain Dynamics Perturbation Analysis Method

**Authors:** Lu Li, Hao Li, Ting Su, Dengming Ming

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/ijms25179172 · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2024-08-23

## TL;DR

This paper introduces a new method to understand how protein–protein interactions affect small molecule binding, which could improve drug design.

## Contribution

The study introduces mcDPA, a novel method to model the impact of PPIs on ligand binding.

## Key findings

- mcDPA predicted ligand-binding regions with 52% accuracy and 55% recall in benchmark complexes.
- The method showed improved performance (60% accuracy, 57% recall) for FDA-approved drugs targeting protein complexes.

## Abstract

Many protein–protein interactions (PPIs) affect the ways in which small molecules bind to their constituent proteins, which can impact drug efficacy and regulatory mechanisms. While recent advances have improved our ability to independently predict both PPIs and ligand–protein interactions (LPIs), a comprehensive understanding of how PPIs affect LPIs is still lacking. Here, we examined 63 pairs of ligand–protein complexes in a benchmark dataset for protein–protein docking studies and quantified six typical effects of PPIs on LPIs. A multi-chain dynamics perturbation analysis method, called mcDPA, was developed to model these effects and used to predict small-molecule binding regions in protein–protein complexes. Our results illustrated that the mcDPA can capture the impact of PPI on LPI to varying degrees, with six similar changes in its predicted ligand-binding region. The calculations showed that 52% of the examined complexes had prediction accuracy at or above 50%, and 55% of the predictions had a recall of not less than 50%. When applied to 33 FDA-approved protein–protein-complex-targeting drugs, these numbers improved to 60% and 57% for the same accuracy and recall rates, respectively. The method developed in this study may help to design drug–target interactions in complex environments, such as in the case of protein–protein interactions.

## Full-text entities

- **Genes:** CD46 (CD46 molecule) [NCBI Gene 4179] {aka AHUS2, MCP, MIC10, TLX, TRA2.10}, NBAS (NBAS subunit of NRZ tethering complex) [NCBI Gene 51594] {aka ILFS2, NAG, SOPH}, AKT1 (AKT serine/threonine kinase 1) [NCBI Gene 207] {aka AKT, PKB, PKB-ALPHA, PRKBA, RAC, RAC-ALPHA}, ACE2 (angiotensin converting enzyme 2) [NCBI Gene 59272] {aka ACEH}
- **Diseases:** injury to people or property (MESH:C000719191), Cat (MESH:D002371), LPIs (MESH:C563663)
- **Chemicals:** FAD (MESH:D005182), imatinib (MESH:D000068877), GDP (MESH:D006153), phosphate (MESH:D010710), 3-aminopyridine-adenine dinucleotide (MESH:C002098), GSP (-), ATP (MESH:D000255), sorafenib (MESH:D000077157), disulfide (MESH:D004220), carbohydrate (MESH:D002241), GTP (MESH:D006160), nucleotide (MESH:D009711), guanine (MESH:D006147)
- **Species:** Escherichia coli (E. coli, species) [taxon 562], Human adenovirus 21 (no rank) [taxon 32608], Pseudomonas aeruginosa (species) [taxon 287], Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]
- **Cell lines:** 2AJF — Homo sapiens (Human), Colon carcinoma, Cancer cell line (CVCL_A628), S2 — Drosophila melanogaster (Fruit fly), Spontaneously immortalized cell line (CVCL_Z232)

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11394879/full.md

## Figures

4 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11394879/full.md

## References

37 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11394879/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11394879