Crystal structures of DCAF1-PROTAC-WDR5 ternary complexes provide insight into DCAF1 substrate specificity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proteolysis-targeting chimeras (PROTACs) have been explored for the degradation of drug targets for more than two decades. However, only a handful of E3 ligase substrate receptors have been efficiently used. Downregulation and mutation of these receptors would reduce the effectiveness of such PROTACs. We recently developed potent ligands for DCAF1, a substrate receptor of EDVP and CUL4 E3 ligases. Here, we focus on DCAF1 toward the development of PROTACs for WDR5, a drug target in various cancers. We report four DCAF1-based PROTACs with endogenous and exogenous WDR5 degradation effects and high-resolution crystal structures of the ternary complexes of DCAF1-PROTAC-WDR5. The structures reveal detailed insights into the interaction of DCAF1 with various WDR5-PROTACs, indicating a significant role of DCAF1 loops in providing needed surface plasticity, and reflecting the mechanism by which DCAF1 functions as a substrate receptor for E3 ligases with diverse sets of substrates. The authors show that DCAF1, a substrate receptor of CUL4 and EDVP E3 ligases, can be recruited by PROTACs to degrade the cancer drug target, WDR5. They also report the crystal structures of PROTAC ternary complexes that reveal a significant role for loops in DCAF1 substrate recognition, a potential mechanism behind the diverse substrate specificity of DCAF1.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".