Quantitative Hydrogen–Deuterium Exchange Mass Spectrometry for Simultaneous Structural Characterization and Affinity Indexing of Single Target Drug Candidate Libraries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrogen–deuterium eXchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS) is increasingly used in drug development to locate binding sites and to identify allosteric effects in drug/target interactions. However, the potential of this technique to quantitatively analyze drug candidate libraries remains largely unexplored. Here, a collection of 13 WDR5-targeting small molecules with surface plasmon resonance (SPR) dissociation coefficients ( K D ) ranging from 20 nM to ∼116 μM were characterized using differential HDX-MS (ΔHDX-MS). Conventional qualitative analysis of the ΔHDX-MS data set revealed the binding interfaces for all compounds and allosteric effects where present. We then demonstrated that ΔHDX-MS signal-to-noise (S/N) not only can rank library-relative affinity but also can accurately predict K D from a calibration curve constructed from high-quality SPR data. Three methods for S/N calculation are explored, each suitable for libraries with different characteristics. Our results demonstrate the potential for ΔHDX-MS use in drug candidate library affinity validation and/or determination while simultaneously characterizing structure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".