TABLE 1 

From the following article:

Reaching for high-hanging fruit in drug discovery at protein–protein interfaces

James A. Wells & Christopher L. McClendon

Nature 450, 1001-1009(13 December 2007)

doi:10.1038/nature06526

BACK TO ARTICLE

Table 1. Comparison of protein and small-molecule binding partners.

LigandMolecular mass (Da)PDB identity of complexAffinity (microM)*Ligand efficiency (kcal per mol per non-hydrogen atom)References

*Where a direct binding dissociation constant was not available or was not the lowest measured, the Ki or IC50 was used instead.

Ligand-efficiency values for the protein–protein pair are given as binding free energy (-DeltaG, in kcal per mol) per non-hydrogen contact atom, because so little of the protein is in contact. Ligand-efficiency values for the small molecule are given as binding free energy (kcal per mol) per non-hydrogen atom36.

The ligand in the X-ray structure is markedly similar to the compound listed.

ND, not determined.

IL-2     
IL-2 receptor alpha-chain24,7901Z920.01050.1133
SP42066631PY20.060.2131, 34
BCL-XL     
BAD-derived peptide (amino acids 100–126)3,1102BZW0.00060.1689
ABT-7378132YXJ0.00060.2347
HDM2     
p53-derived peptide (amino acids 15–29)1,8081YCR0.60.1251
Nutlin-35811RV10.090.2453
Benzodiazepinedione5661T4E0.0670.3154, 55
HPV E2     
E124,6301TUE0.060.1462
Compound 236841R6N0.0060.2860, 61
ZipA     
FtsZ-derived peptide (amino acids 367–383)2,0241F4721.60.1363
Compound 14251Y2F120.2367
TNF     
Subunit protein17,3811TNFNDND90
SP3045482AZ5130.1770