ArticleBMC bioinformatics2022
Densest subgraph-based methods for protein-protein interaction hot spot prediction.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHot spots play an important role in protein binding analysis. The residue interaction network is a key point in hot spot prediction, and several graph theory-based methods have been proposed to detect hot spots. Although the existing methods can yield some interesting residues by network analysis, low recall has limited their abilities in finding more potential hot spots.
resultIn this study, we develop three graph theory-based methods to predict hot spots from only a single residue interaction network. We detect the important residues by finding subgraphs with high densities, i.e., high average degrees. Generally, a high degree implies a high binding possibility between protein chains, and thus a subgraph with high density usually relates to binding sites that have a high rate of hot spots. By evaluating the results on 67 complexes from the SKEMPI database, our methods clearly outperform existing graph theory-based methods on recall and F-score. In particular, our main method, Min-SDS, has an average recall of over 0.665 and an f2-score of over 0.364, while the recall and f2-score of the existing methods are less than 0.400 and 0.224, respectively.
conclusionThe Min-SDS method performs best among all tested methods on the hot spot prediction problem, and all three of our methods provide useful approaches for analyzing bionetworks. In addition, the densest subgraph-based methods predict hot spots with only one residue interaction network, which is constructed from spatial atomic coordinate data to mitigate the shortage of data from wet-lab experiments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.