Sandbox Reserved 1849: Difference between revisions

From Proteopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 34: Line 34:


==Minibinders==
==Minibinders==
===Design===
These mini binders, <scene name='10/1075249/Ahb2_fullspikeprotein/1'>AHB2</scene>  and <scene name='10/1075249/Lcb1_fullspike_rotating/1'>LCB1</scene>, were designed from “scratch” (de novo) with the intention to mimic the binding of ACE2 to spike protein <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. Using Rotamer Interaction Field (RIF) docking, the proteins were able to make the most efficient bonding using the ACE2 spike protein binding interface <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. Using Site Saturation Mutagenesis (SSM), every residue in the minibinder’s helix scaffold will be substituted with each of the 20 amino acids, one at a time <ref name="Valleti">PMID:24970191</ref>. Forming SSM libraries, each of the libraries converged on a small number of closely related sequences, and from these libraries, the design was selected for AHB2 and LCB1 to find the sequence that yields a protein with a high affinity for the spike proteins receptor binding domain  <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. AHB2 was designed using ACE2 helix scaffold, while LCB1 and LCB3 were designed full from scratch, attempting to make the best possible helix with the greatest affinity for the spike protein receptors <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. Although LCB1 was designed before LCB3, LCB3 was less effective at neutralizing the viral response with a higher IC50 value <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>.
===Structure===
===Structure===
The goal of designing these minibinders was to create a molecule with a higher binding affinity with the RBD than ACE2, meaning they had to be designed with specific residues that form stronger connections with the same binding pockets that ACE2 would bind to <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. This section highlights some important residue differences between the minibinders and ACE2 that give the minibinders a higher affinity.  
The goal of designing these minibinders was to create a molecule with a higher binding affinity with the RBD than ACE2, meaning they had to be designed with specific residues that form stronger connections with the same binding pockets that ACE2 would bind to <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. This section highlights some important residue differences between the minibinders and ACE2 that give the minibinders a higher affinity.  
Line 46: Line 50:
The effect of the minibinders’ higher affinity to the spike protein RBD is that ACE2’s binding site is now sterically blocked, meaning, ACE2 cannot bind to the spike protein and initiate the infection pathway. This effectively hinders the effects of the virus, which accomplishes the goal of creating these minibinders<ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>.  
The effect of the minibinders’ higher affinity to the spike protein RBD is that ACE2’s binding site is now sterically blocked, meaning, ACE2 cannot bind to the spike protein and initiate the infection pathway. This effectively hinders the effects of the virus, which accomplishes the goal of creating these minibinders<ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>.  


===Design===
These mini binders, <scene name='10/1075249/Ahb2_fullspikeprotein/1'>AHB2</scene>  and <scene name='10/1075249/Lcb1_fullspike_rotating/1'>LCB1</scene>, were designed from “scratch” (de novo) with the intention to mimic the binding of ACE2 to spike protein <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. Using Rotamer Interaction Field (RIF) docking, the proteins were able to make the most efficient bonding using the ACE2 spike protein binding interface <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. Using Site Saturation Mutagenesis (SSM), every residue in the minibinder’s helix scaffold will be substituted with each of the 20 amino acids, one at a time <ref name="Valleti">PMID:24970191</ref>. Forming SSM libraries, each of the libraries converged on a small number of closely related sequences, and from these libraries, the design was selected for AHB2 and LCB1 to find the sequence that yields a protein with a high affinity for the spike proteins receptor binding domain  <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. AHB2 was designed using ACE2 helix scaffold, while LCB1 and LCB3 were designed full from scratch, attempting to make the best possible helix with the greatest affinity for the spike protein receptors <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>. Although LCB1 was designed before LCB3, LCB3 was less effective at neutralizing the viral response with a higher IC50 value <ref name="Longxing">PMID:32907861</ref>.
== Implications ==
== Implications ==
===Potency of Minibinders===
===Potency of Minibinders===

Revision as of 18:57, 17 April 2025

This Sandbox is Reserved from March 18 through September 1, 2025 for use in the course CH462 Biochemistry II taught by R. Jeremy Johnson and Mark Macbeth at the Butler University, Indianapolis, USA. This reservation includes Sandbox Reserved 1828 through Sandbox Reserved 1846.
To get started:
  • Click the edit this page tab at the top. Save the page after each step, then edit it again.
  • show the Scene authoring tools, create a molecular scene, and save it. Copy the green link into the page.
  • Add a description of your scene. Use the buttons above the wikitext box for bold, italics, links, headlines, etc.

More help: Help:Editing

SARS-COV2 Minibinders

LCB1 (PDB:7JZU) | An example of a novel minibinder, LCB1 (Blue), bound to the spike RBD of SARS-COV-2 (Off-White)

Drag the structure with the mouse to rotate

Color Key

■ -> ACE2

■ -> Spike RBD

■ -> AHB2

■ -> LCB1

■ -> LCB3

Contributions

References