The Influence of 150-Cavity Binders on the Dynamics of Influenza A Neuraminidases as Revealed by Molecular Dynamics Simulations and Combined Clustering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuraminidase inhibitors are the main pharmaceutical agents employed for treatments of influenza infections. The neuraminidase structures typically exhibit a 150-cavity, an exposed pocket that is adjacent to the catalytic site. This site offers promising additional contact points for improving potency of existing pharmaceuticals, as well as generating entirely new candidate inhibitors. Several inhibitors based on known compounds and designed to interact with 150-cavity residues have been reported. However, the dynamics of any of these inhibitors remains unstudied and their viability remains unknown. This work reports the outcome of long-term, all-atom molecular dynamics simulations of four such inhibitors, along with three standard inhibitors for comparison. Each is studied in complex with four representative neuraminidase structures, which are also simulated in the absence of ligands for comparison, resulting in a total simulation time of 9.6 µs. Our results demonstrate that standard inhibitors characteristically reduce the mobility of these dynamic proteins, while the 150-binders do not, instead giving rise to many unique conformations. We further describe an improved RMSD-based clustering technique that isolates these conformations--the structures of which are provided to facilitate future molecular docking studies--and reveals their interdependence. We find that this approach confers many advantages over previously described techniques, and the implications for rational drug design are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".