More Like this

1. What method to use for protein–protein docking?

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbi.2018.12.010  

   Porter, Kathryn A; Desta, Israel; Kozakov, Dima; Vajda, Sandor (April 2019, Current Opinion in Structural Biology)
2. Remarkable Insensitivity of Protein Diffusion to Protein Charge

   https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpclett.4c02062  

   Mostajabi_Sarhangi, Setare; Matyushov, Dmitry V (September 2024, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters)
3. Identifying hydrophobic protein patches to inform protein interaction interfaces

   https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2018234118  

   Rego, Nicholas B.; Xi, Erte; Patel, Amish J. (February 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)

   Interactions between proteins lie at the heart of numerous biological processes and are essential for the proper functioning of the cell. Although the importance of hydrophobic residues in driving protein interactions is universally accepted, a characterization of protein hydrophobicity, which informs its interactions, has remained elusive. The challenge lies in capturing the collective response of the protein hydration waters to the nanoscale chemical and topographical protein patterns, which determine protein hydrophobicity. To address this challenge, here, we employ specialized molecular simulations wherein water molecules are systematically displaced from the protein hydration shell; by identifying protein regions that relinquish their waters more readily than others, we are then able to uncover the most hydrophobic protein patches. Surprisingly, such patches contain a large fraction of polar/charged atoms and have chemical compositions that are similar to the more hydrophilic protein patches. Importantly, we also find a striking correspondence between the most hydrophobic protein patches and regions that mediate protein interactions. Our work thus establishes a computational framework for characterizing the emergent hydrophobicity of amphiphilic solutes, such as proteins, which display nanoscale heterogeneity, and for uncovering their interaction interfaces. 

   more » « less
4. Nature’s Shortcut to Protein Folding

   https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.8b11634  

   Bergasa-Caceres, Fernando; Haas, Elisha; Rabitz, Herschel A. (May 2019, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B)
5. Peptide and protein chemistry approaches to study the tumor suppressor protein p53

   https://doi.org/10.1039/D2OB00902A  

   Chatterjee, Champak; Singh, Sumeet K. (June 2022, Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry)

   The tumor suppressor and master gene regulator protein p53 has been the subject of intense investigation for several decades due to its mutation in about half of all human cancers. However, mechanistic studies of p53 in cells are complicated by its many dynamic binding partners and heterogeneous post-translational modifications. The design of therapeutics that rescue p53 functions in cells requires a mechanistic understanding of its protein–protein interactions in specific protein complexes and identifying changes in p53 activity by diverse post-translational modifications. This review highlights the important roles that peptide and protein chemistry have played in biophysical and biochemical studies aimed at elucidating p53 regulation by several key binding partners. The design of various peptide inhibitors that rescue p53 function in cells and new opportunities in targeting p53-protein interactions are discussed. In addition, the review highlights the importance of a protein semisynthesis approach to comprehend the role of site-specific PTMs in p53 regulation. 

   more » « less