ArticleScientific reports2026
In silico discovery of thioglycoside analogues as donor-site inhibitors of glycosyltransferase LgtC.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The growing prevalence of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens highlights the urgent need for therapeutic strategies that complement traditional antibiotics by targeting essential virulence pathways. Glycosyltransferase LgtC, a key enzyme in lipooligosaccharide (LOS) biosynthesis, represents an attractive target for antivirulence approaches because of its essential role in bacterial immune evasion and pathogenicity. In this work, we employed an integrated in silico pipeline to identify thioglycoside analogs structurally related to the metabolic decoys FucSBn and BacSBn, evaluating their potential to hit the UDP-galactose donor pocket of LgtC. A similarity-based screening in PubChem, followed by ADME-Tox filtering yield 18 candidate analogs. Molecular docking using AutoDock-GPU revealed several candidates, most notably C-5 (- 8.36 kcal/mol) and C-18 (- 8.13 kcal/mol), to bind favorably within the donor site, showing more negative mean scoring values than natural donor UDP-α-D-galactose (- 6.74 kcal/mol). Redocking of the natural ligand reproduced the crystallographic pose, supporting the reliability of the docking protocol. To assess dynamic behavior, 100 ns molecular dynamics simulations (AMBER14) were performed for each complex. The top-scoring analogs maintained stable binding poses, with RMSD values of ~ 2.0-3.0 Å and preserved donor-like hydrogen-bond networks complemented by π-stacking and sulfur-mediated contacts. These interaction patterns suggest that the thioglycoside analogs may occupy the donor site in a manner compatible with competitive binding. While docking and MD describe different aspects of ligand recognition, several trends observed in docking, such as the favorable binding scores of C-5 and C-18, are broadly consistent with their ability to maintain stable poses during MD. Based on this consistency and scoring, the thioglycoside scaffolds C-5, C-14, and C-18 emerge as computationally prioritized candidates for subsequent biochemical testing against LgtC. Furthermore, these scaffolds offer a mechanistic basis and putative starting points for future structure-based optimization of thioglycoside analogs aimed at disrupting LOS biosynthesis in multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria.
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.