ArticleProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society2025
Predicting interacting hotspots for nanobodies' binding using triplets of residues.
Article in Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Predicting interacting hotspots for nanobodies' binding using triplets of residues.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Protein-protein interactions (PPI) are fundamental to cellular signaling, forming robust networks that govern critical biological processes such as immune response, cell growth, and signal transduction. Nanobody-based therapies have emerged as a key strategy for modulating PPIs, offering exceptional potential due to their high specificity, stability, and ability to access challenging epitopes on PPI interfaces inside cells. The rational design of nanobodies relies mainly on understanding and predicting their binding regions, particularly the residues that contribute the most to the binding energy (binding hotspots). Existing computational methods do not fully provide a scalable solution for hotspot identification in nanobody design, leaving a critical gap in the rational design of these therapeutics. Here, we present a scalable and structure-aware algorithm for hotspot prediction in nanobody design. The algorithm queries a curated database of triplets of interacting residues obtained from ~20,000 non-redundant PDB structures. We showed that these triplets contain structural and energetic information, being able to assess the stability effect of residue variations in protein structures, Pearson R = 0.63 (MSE = 1.58 kcal/mol). More important than effects on stability is the ability of the algorithm to predict binding hotspots of protein-protein generic complexes and more specifically in complexes containing nanobodies. HotspotPred reached an accuracy of 0.73 for hotspot residue identification in a protein interaction dataset of 1160 Alanine mutants and correctly identified in 63.4% of the cases we predicted at least 2 residues on the binding surface.
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.