Conformational flexibility in designing peptides for immunology: The molecular dynamics approach

Current Computer-Aided Drug Design

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 207-222

  Stavrakoudis, Athanassios ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

Author keywords

Antibody; Antibody antigen interactions; Antigen; B cell; Complement system; Computer simulation; Epitope; Epitope prediction; Mhc; Molecular dynamics; T cell; Tcr; Vaccine design

Indexed keywords

ANTIBODIES; BIOINFORMATICS; COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; EPITOPES; PEPTIDES; PHYSIOLOGY; T-CELLS; VACCINES;

ANTIBODY-ANTIGEN INTERACTIONS; B CELLS; COMPLEMENT SYSTEMS; CONFORMATIONAL FLEXIBILITY; DYNAMIC APPROACHES; DYNAMICS SIMULATION; EPITOPE PREDICTIONS; MHC; TCR; VACCINE DESIGN;

MOLECULAR DYNAMICS;

ALEMTUZUMAB; ALPHA 67-76 PEPTIDE; ART V 19-36 PEPTIDE; EPITOPE; GP2 PEPTIDE; HLA A2 ANTIGEN; HLA B27 ANTIGEN; INDEL PEPTIDE; INFLUENZA VIRUS MATRIX PROTEIN 58-66; MAJOR HISTOCOMPATIBILITY ANTIGEN CLASS 1; MYELIN BASIC PROTEIN[87-99]; PEPTIDE DERIVATIVE; PORIN A; PVIPR PEPTIDE; STRP9 PEPTIDE; T LYMPHOCYTE ANTIGEN; T LYMPHOCYTE RECEPTOR; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; YEA9 PEPTIDE; LYMPHOCYTE ANTIGEN RECEPTOR; PEPTIDE; VACCINE;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; ENTROPY; HUMAN; IMMUNOGENICITY; IMMUNOLOGY; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; ANIMAL; ANTIGEN ANTIBODY COMPLEX; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DRUG DESIGN; MOLECULAR MIMICRY; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN STABILITY; REVIEW; STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; T LYMPHOCYTE; THERMODYNAMICS;

ANIMALS; ANTIGEN-ANTIBODY COMPLEX; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; DRUG DESIGN; HUMANS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; MOLECULAR MIMICRY; PEPTIDES; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; PROTEIN STABILITY; RECEPTORS, ANTIGEN, T-CELL; STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; T-LYMPHOCYTES; THERMODYNAMICS; VACCINES;

EID: 78049512800     PISSN: 15734099     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/157340910791760073     Document Type: Article

References (128)

1. Loffet, A. Peptides as drugs: is there a market? J. Pept. Sci., 2002,8, 1-7.
2. Otvos, L.J. Peptide-based drug design: here and now. Methods Mol.Biol., 2008, 494, 1-8.
3. Dings, R.P.; Mayo, K.H. A journey in structure-based drugdiscovery: from designed peptides to protein surface topomimeticsas antibiotic and antiangiogenic agents. Acc. Chem. Res., 2007, 40,1057-1065.
4. Clynen, E.; Baggerman, G.; Husson, S.J.; Landuyt, B.; Schoofs, L. Peptidomics in drug research. Exp. Opin. Drug Disc., 2008, 3, 425-440.
5. Stavrakoudis, A. Conformational studies of the 313-320 and 313-332 peptide fragments derived from the IIb subunit of integrinreceptor with molecular dynamics simulations. Int. J. Pept. Res.Ther., 2009, 15, 263-272.
6. Andrusier, N.; Mashiach, E.; Nussinov, R.; Wolfson, H.J. Principles of flexible protein-protein docking. Proteins, 2008, 73,271-289.
7. Alberts, I.L.; Todorov, N.P.; Dean, P.M. Receptor flexibility in denovo ligand design and docking. J. Med. Chem., 2005, 48, 6585-6596.
8. Carlson, H.A.; McCammon, J.A. Accommodating proteinflexibility in computational drug design. Mol. Pharmacol., 2000,57, 213-218.
9. Brooijmans, N.; Kuntz, I.D. Molecular recognition and dockingalgorithms. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct., 2003, 32, 335-373.
10. B-Rao, C.; Subramanian, J.; Sharma, S.D. Managing proteinflexibility in docking and its applications. Drug Discov. Today,2009, 14, 394-400.
11. Legge, F.S.; Budi, A.; Treutlein, H.; Yarovsky, I. Proteinflexibility: multiple molecular dynamics simulations of insulinchain B. Biophys. Chem., 2006, 119, 146-157.
12. Jorgensen, W.L. The many roles of computation in drug discovery. Science, 2004, 303, 1813-1318.
13. Galeazzi, R. Molecular dynamics as a tool in rational drug design:current status and some major applications. Curr. Comput.-AidedDrug Des., 2009, 5, 225-240.
14. McCammon, J.A.; Gelin, B.R.; Karplus, M. Dynamics of foldedproteins. Nature, 1977, 267, 585-590.
15. van Gunsteren, W.F.; Dolenc, J.; Mark, A.E. Molecular simulationas an aid to experimentalists. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., 2008, 18,149-153.
16. Karplus, M.; McCammon, J.A. Molecular Dynamics simulations ofbiomolecules. Nat. Struct. Biol., 2002, 9, 646-652.
17. Mackerell, A.D.J.; Feig, M.; Feig, M.F.; Brooks, C.L. 3rdExtending the treatment of backbone energetics in protein forcefields: limitations of gas-phase quantum mechanics in reproducingprotein conformational distributions in molecular dynamicssimulations. J. Comput. Chem., 2004, 25, 1400-1415.
18. Stavrakoudis, A. Molecular dynamics simulations of anapoliprotein A-I derived peptide in explicit water. Chem. Phys.Lett., 2008, 461, 294-299.
19. Ponder, J.W.; Case, D.A. Force fields for protein simulations. Adv.Protein Chem., 2003, 66, 27-85.
20. MacKerell, A.D.J. Empirical force fields for biologicalmacromolecules: overview and issues. J. Comput. Chem., 2004, 25,1584-1604.
21. van Gunsteren, W.F.; Balkowies, D.; Baron, R.; Chandrasekhar, I.; Christen, M.; Daura, X.; Gee, P.; Geerke, D.P.; Glattli, A.; Hunenberger, P.H.; Kastenholz, M.A.; Oostenbrink, C.; Schenk, M.; Trzesniak, D.; van der Vegt, N.F.A.; Yu, B.Y. Biomolecularmodeling: goals, problems, perspectives. Angew Chem. Int. Ed.Engl., 2006, 45, 4064-4092.
22. Flower, D.R. Towards in silico prediction of immunogenicepitopes. Trends Immunol., 2003, 24, 667-674
23. Saksena, R.S.; Boghosian, B.; Fazendeiro, L.; Kenway, O.A.; Manos, S.; Mazzeo, M.D.; Sadiq, S.K.; Suter, J.L.; Wright, D.; Coveney, P.V. Real science at the petascale. Philos. Transact. AMath Phys. Eng. Sci., 2009, 367, 2557-2571.
24. Sadiq, S.K.; Wright, D.; Watson, S.J.; Zasada, S.J.; Stoica, I.; Coveney, P.V. Automated molecular simulation based bindingaffinity calculator for ligand-bound HIV-1 proteases. J. Chem. Inf.Model., 2008, 48, 1909-1919.
25. Sadiq, S.K.; Mazzeo, M.D.; Zasada, S.J.; Manos, S.; Stoica, I.; Gale, C.V.; Watson, S.J.; Kellam, P.; Brew, S.; Coveney, P.V. Patient-specific simulation as a basis for clinical decision-making.Philos. Transact. A Math Phys. Eng. Sci., 2008, 366, 3199-3219.
26. Mallik, B.; Morikis, D. Applications of molecular dynamicssimulations in immunology: a useful computational method inaiding vaccine design. Curr. Proteomics, 2006, 3, 259-270.
27. Rognan, D.; Reddehase, M.J.; Koszinowski, U.H.; Folkers, G. Molecular modeling of an antigenic complex between a viralpeptide and a class I major histocompatibility glycoprotein. Proteins, 1992, 13, 70-85.
28. Stavrakoudis, A.; Demetropoulos, I.N.; Sakarellos, C.; Sakarellos-Daitsiotis, M.; Tsikaris, V. Design, synthesis and catalytic activityof a serine protease synthetic model. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther., 1997,4, 481-487.
29. Stavrakoudis, A.; Makropoulou, S.; Tsikaris, V.; Sakarellos-Daitsiotis, M.; Sakarellos, C.; Demetropoulos, I.N. Computationalscreening of branched cyclic peptide motifs as potential enzymemimetics. J. Pept. Sci., 2003, 9, 145-155.
30. Tatsis, V.A.; Stavrakoudis, A.; Demetropoulos, I.N. LysinebasedTrypsinActSite(LysTAS): A configurational tool of theTINKER software to evaluate Lysine based branched cyclicpeptides as potential chymotrypsin-mimetics. Mol. Simul., 2006,32, 643-644.
31. Tatsis, V.A.; Stavrakoudis, A.; Demetropoulos, I.N. MolecularDynamics as a pattern recognition tool: An automated processdetects peptides that preserve the 3D arrangement of trypsin'sactive site. Biophys. Chem., 2008, 133, 36-44.
32. Stavrakoudis, A.; Tsoulos, I.G.; Shenkarev, Z.O.; Ovchinnikova,T.V. Molecular dynamics simulation of antimicrobial peptidearenicin-2: beta-hairpin stabilization by noncovalent interactions. Biopolymers, 2009, 92, 143-155.
33. Mehrnejad, F.; Naderi-Manesh, H.; Ranjbar, B. The structuralproperties of magainin in water, TFE/water, and aqueous ureasolutions: molecular dynamics simulations. Proteins, 2007, 67,931-940.
34. Trzesniak, D.; Glattli, A.; Jaun, B.; van Gunsteren, W.F. Interpreting NMR data for beta-peptides using molecular dynamicssimulations. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2005, 127, 14320-14329.
35. Sorin, E.J.; Pande, V.S. Exploring the helix-coil transition via all-atom equilibrium ensemble simulations. Biophys. J., 2005, 88,2472-2493.
36. Duan, Y.; Kollman, P.A. Pathways to a protein foldingintermediate observed in a 1-microsecond simulation in aqueoussolution. Science, 1998, 282, 740-744.
37. Cornell, W.D.; Cieplak, P.; Bayly, C.I.; Gould, I.R.; Merz, K.M.; Ferguson, D.M.; Spellmeyer, D.C.; Fox, T.; Caldwell, J.W.; Kollman, P.A. A second generation force field for the simulation ofproteins, nucleic acids, and organic molecules. J. Am. Chem. Soc.,1996, 118, 2309-2309.
38. Brooks, B.R.; Bruccoleri, R.E.; Olafson, B.D.; States, D.J.; Swaminathan, S.; Karplus, M. CHARMM-A program formacromolecular energy, minimization, and dynamics calculations. J. Comput. Chem., 1983, 4, 187-217.
39. Phillips, J.C.; Braun, R.; Wang, W.; Gumbart, J.; Tajkhorshid, E.; Villa, E.; Chipot, C.; Skeel, R.D.; Kale, L.; Schulten, K. Scalable molecular dynamics with NAMD. J. Comput. Chem., 2005, 26, 1781-1802
40. Scott, W.R.P.; Hunenberger, P.H.; Tironi, I.G.; Mark, A.E.; Billeter, S.R.; Fennen, J.; Torda, A.E.; Huber, T.; Kruger, P.; vanGunsteren, W.F. The GROMOS biomolecular simulation programpackage. J. Phys. Chem. A, 1999, 103, 3596-3607.
41. Berendsen, H.J.C.; van der Spoel, D.; van Drunen, R. GROMACS: A message-passing parallel molecular dynamics implementation. Comput. Phys. Commun., 1995, 91, 43-56.
42. Glykos, N.M. Carma: a molecular dynamics analysis program. J.Comput. Chem., 2006, 27, 1765-1768.
43. Garrant, B.; McCammon, J.A. Bio3D: analysis. Bioinformatics,2006, 11, 11-21.
44. Grochowski, P.; Trylska, J. Continuum molecular electrostatics,salt effects, and counterion binding - a review of the Poisson-Boltzmann theory and its modifications. Biopolymers, 2008, 89,93-113.
45. Bashford, D.; Case, D.A. Generalized born models ofmacromolecular solvation effects. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem., 2000,51, 129-152.
46. Roux, B.; Simonson, T. Implicit solvent models. Biophys. Chem.,1999, 78, 1-20.
47. Gilson, M.K.; Zhou, H.X. Calculation of protein-ligand bindingaffinities. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct., 2007, 36, 21-42.
48. Sitkoff, D.; Sharp, K.A.; Honig, B. Accurate calculation ofhydration free-energies using macroscopic solvent models. J. Phys.Chem., 1994, 98, 1978-1988.
49. Massova, I.; Kollman, P.A. Computational alanine scanning toprobe protein-protein interactions: a novel approach to evaluatebinding free energies. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1999, 121, 8133-8143.
50. Simonson, T.; Archontis, G.; Karplus, M. Free energy simulationscome of age: protein-ligand recognition. Acc. Chem. Res., 2002, 35,430-437.
51. Kuhn, B.; Gerber, P.; Schulz-Gasch, T.; Stahl, M. Validation anduse of the MM-PBSA approach for drug discovery. J. Med. Chem.,2005, 48, 4040-4048.
52. Swanson, J.M.J.; Henchman, R.H.; McCammon, J.A. Revisitingfree energy calculations: a theoretical connection to MM/PBSA anddirect calculations of the association free energy. Biophys. J., 2004,86, 67-74.
53. Fogolari, F.; Brigo, A.; Molinari, H. Protocol for MM/PBSAmolecular dynamics simulations of proteins. Biophys. J., 2003, 85,159-166.
54. Ooi, T.; Oobatake, M.; Nemethy, G.; Scheraga, H.A. Accessiblesurface areas as a measure of the thermodynamic parameters ofhydration of peptides. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 1987, 84, 3086-3090.
55. Baker, N.A.; Sept, D.; Joseph, S.; Holst, M.J.; McCammon, J.A. Electrostatics of nanosystems: application to microtubules and theribosome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2001, 98, 10037-10041.
56. Brooks, B.R.; Janesic, D.; Karplus, M. Harmonic analysis of largesystems. I. methodology. J. Comput. Chem., 1995, 16, 1522-1542.
57. Carlsson, J.; Aqvist, J. Calculations of solute and solvent entropiesfrom molecular dynamics simulations. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.,2006, 8, 5385-5395.
58. Karplus, M.; Kushick, J.N. Method for estimating theconfigurational entropy of macromolecules. Macromolecules,1981, 14, 325-332.
59. Killian, B.J.; Kravitz, J.Y.; Somani, S.; Dasgupta, P.; Pang, Y.-P.; Gilson, M.K. Configurational entropy in protein-peptide binding:computational study of Tsg101 ubiquitin E2 variant domain withan hiv-derived PTAP nonapeptide. J. Mol. Biol., 2009, 389, 315-335.
60. Hsu, S.-T.D.; Peter, C.; van Gunsteren, W.F.; Bonvin, M.J.J. Entropy calculation of HIV-1 Env gp120, its receptor CD4, andtheir complex: an analysis of configurational entropy changes uponcomplexation. Biophys. J., 2005, 88, 15-24.
61. Schlitter, J. Estimation of absolute and relative entropies ofmacromolecules using the covariance-matrix. Chem. Phys. Lett.,1993, 215, 487-496.
62. Grossfield, A.; Feller, S.E.; Pitman, M.C. Convergence ofmolecular dynamics simulations of membrane proteins. Proteins,2007, 67, 31-40.
63. Smith, B.J.; Daura, X.; Van Gunsteren, W.F. Assessingequilibration and convergence in biomolecular simulations. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinf., 2002, 48, 487-496.
64. Yang, W.; Bitetti-Putzer, R.; Karplus, M. Free energy simulations:use of reverse cumulative averaging to determine the equilibratedregion and the time required for convergence. J. Chem. Phys.,2004, 120, 2618-2628.
65. Lyman, E.; Zuckerman, D.M. Ensemble-based convergenceanalysis of biomolecular trajectories. Biophys. J., 2006, 91, 164-172.
66. Pappalardo, F.; Halling-Brown, M.D.; Rapin, N.; Zhang, P.; Alemani, D.; Emerson, A.; Paci, P.; Duroux, P.; Pennisi, M.; Palladini, A.; Miotto, O.; Churchill, D.; Rossi, E.; Shepherd, A.J.; Moss, D.S.; Castiglione, F.; Bernaschi, M.; Lefranc, M.P.; Brunak, S.; Motta, S.; Lollini, P.L.; Basford, K.E.; Brusic, V. ImmunoGrid,an integrative environment for large-scale simulation of theimmune system for vaccine discovery, design and optimization. Brief Bioinform., 2009, 10, 330-340.
67. Zhang, G.L.; Khan, A.M.; Srinivasan, K.N.; August, J.T.; Brusic, V. MULTIPRED: a computational system for prediction ofpromiscuous HLA binding peptides. Nucleic Acids Res., 2005, 33,W172-179.
68. Tong, J.C.; Ren, E.C. Immunoinformatics: Current trends andfuture directions. Drug Discov. Today, 2009, 14, 684-689.
69. Todman, S.J.; Halling-Brown, M.D.; Davies, M.N.; Flower, D.R.; Kayikci, M.; Moss, D.S. Toward the atomistic simulation of T cellepitopes automated construction of MHC: peptide structures forfree energy calculations. J. Mol. Graph. Model., 2008, 26, 957-961.
70. Schafroth, D.H.; Floudas, A.C. Predicting peptide binding to MHCpockets via molecular modeling, implicit solvation, and globaloptimization. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinf., 2004, 54, 534-556.
71. Wan, S.; Flower, D.R.; Coveney, P.V. Toward an atomisticunderstanding of the immune synapse: Large-scale moleculardynamics simulation of a membrane-embedded TCR-pMHC-CD4complex. Mol. Immunol., 2008, 45, 1221-1230.
72. Sieker, F.; May, A.; Zacharias, M. Predicting affinity andspecificity of antigenic Peptide binding to major histocompatibilityclass I molecules. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci., 2009, 10, 286-296.
73. Petrone, P.M.; Garcia, A.E. MHC-peptide binding is assisted bybound water molecules. J. Mol. Biol., 2004, 338, 419-435.
74. Knapp, B.; Omasits, U.; Bohle, B.; Maillere, B.; Ebner, C.; Schreiner, W.; Jahn-Schmid, B. 3-Layer-based analysis of peptide-MHC interaction: in silico prediction, peptide binding affinity andT cell activation in a relevant allergen-specific model. Mol.Immunol., 2009, 46, 1839-1844.
75. Fagerberg, T.; Cerottini, J.C.; Michielin, O. Structural prediction ofpeptides bound to MHC class I. J. Mol. Biol., 2006, 356, 521-546.
76. Rognan, D.; Zimmermann, N.; Jung, G.; Gerd Folkers, G. Molecular dynamics study of a complex between the humanhistocompatibility antigen HLA-A2 and the IMP58-66 nonapeptidefrom influenza virus matrix protein. Eur. J. Biochem., 1992, 208,101-113.
77. Madden, D.R.; Gorga, J.C.; Strominger, J.L.; Wiley, D.C. Thethree-dimensional structure of HLA-B27 at 2.1 A resolutionsuggests a general mechanism for tight peptide binding to MHC. Cell, 1992, 70, 1035-1048.
78. Toh, H.; Savoie, C.S.; Kamikawaji, N.; Muta, S.; Sasazuki, T.; Kuhara, S. Changes at the floor of the peptide-binding grooveinduce a strong preference for proline at position 3 of the boundpeptide: Molecular dynamics simulations of HLA-A*0217. Biopolymers, 2000, 54, 318-327.
79. Joseph, M.A.; Mitchell, M.L.; Evanseck, J.D.; Kovacs, J.R.; Jia, L.; Shen, H.; Meng, W.S. Secondary anchor substitutions in an HLA-A*0201-restricted T-cell epitope derived from Her-2/neu. Mol.Immunol., 2007, 44, 322-331.
80. Kuhns, J.J.; Batalia, M.A.; Yan, S.; Collins, E.J. Poor binding of aHER-2/neu epitope (GP2) to HLA-A2.1 is due to a lack ofinteractions with the center of the peptide. J. Biol. Chem., 1999,274, 36422-36427.
81. Meng, W.S.; von Grafenstein, H.; Haworth, I.S. Water dynamics atthe binding interface of four different HLA-A2-peptide complexes. Int. Immunol., 2000, 12, 949-957.
82. Ma, B.; Nussinov, R. Trp/Met/Phe hot spots in protein-proteininteractions: potential targets in drug design. Curr. Top. Med.Chem., 2007, 7, 999-1005.
83. Fiorillo, M.T.; Maragno, M.; Butler, R.; Dupuis, M.L.; Sorrentino,R. CD8(+) T-cell autoreactivity to an HLA-B27 restricted self-epitope correlates with ankylosing spondylytis. J. Clin. Invest.,2000, 106, 47-53.
84. Hülsmeyer, M.; Fiorillo, M.T.; Bettosini, F.; Sorrentino, R.; Saenger, W.; Ziegler, A.; Uchanska-Ziegler, B. Dual, HLA-B27subtype-dependent conformation of a self-peptide. J. Exp. Med.,2004, 199, 271-281.
85. Fabian, H.; Huser, H.; Narzi, D.; Misselwitz, R.; Loll, B.; Ziegler, A.; Bockmann, R.A.; Uchanska-Ziegler, B.; Naumann, D. HLA-B27 subtypes differentially associated with disease exhibitconformational differences in solution. J. Mol. Biol., 2008, 376,798-810.
86. Lazoura, E.; Lodding, J.; Farrugia, W.; Ramsland, P.A.; Apostolopoulos, V. Non-canonical anchor motif peptides bound toMHC class I induce cellular responses. Mol. Immunol., 2009, 46,1171-1178.
87. Toh, H.; Kamikawaji, N.; Tana, T.; Sasazuki, T.; Kuhara, S. Molecular dynamics simulations of HLA-DR4 (DRB1*0405)complexed with analogue peptide: conformational changes in theputative T-cell receptor binding regions. Protein Eng., 1998, 11,1027-1032.
88. Zavala-Ruiz, Z.; Strug, I.; Walker, B.D.; Norris, P.J.; Stern, L.J. Ahairpin turn in a class II MHC-bound peptide orients residuesoutside the binding groove for T cell recognition. Proc. Natl. Acad.Sci. USA, 2004, 101, 13279-13284.
89. Mantzourani, E.D.; Platts, J.A.; Brancale, A.; Mavromoustakos, T.M.; Tselios, T.V. Molecular dynamics at the receptor level ofimmunodominant myelin basic protein epitope 87-99 implicated inmultiple sclerosis and its antagonists altered peptide ligands:triggering of immune response. J. Mol. Graph. Model., 2007, 26,471-481.
90. Li, Z.; Lazaridis, T. Water at biomolecular binding interfaces. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2007, 9, 573-580.
91. Wong, S.; Amaro, R.E.; McCammon, J.A. MM-PBSA captures keyrole of intercalating water molecules at a protein-protein interface. J. Chem. Theory Comput., 2009, 5, 422-429.
92. Painter, C.A.; Cruz, A.; Lopez, G.E.; Stern, L.J.; Zavala-Ruiz, Z. Model for the peptide-free conformation of class II MHC proteins. PLoS Biol., 2008, 3, e2403.
93. Villa, E.; Balaeff, A.; Schulten, K. Structural dynamics of the lacrepressor-DNA complex revealed by a multiscale simulation. Proc.Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2005, 102, 6783-6788.
94. Zacharias, M.; Springer, S. Conformational flexibility of the MHCclass I alpha1-alpha2 domain in peptide bound and free states: amolecular dynamics simulation study. Biophys. J., 2004, 87, 2203-2214.
95. Sundberg, E.J.; Mariuzza, R.A. Molecular recognition in antibody-antigen complexes. Adv. Protein Chem., 2002, 61, 119-160.
96. MacCallum, R.M.; Martin, A.C.; Thornton, J.M. Antibody-antigeninteractions: contact analysis and binding site topography. J. Mol.Biol., 1996, 262, 732-745.
97. Lafont, V.; Schaefer, M.; Stote, R.H.; Altschuh, D.; Dejaegere, A.Protein-protein recognition and interaction hot spots in an antigen-antibody complex: free energy decomposition identifies efficientamino acids. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Bioinf., 2007, 67, 418-434.
98. Oomen, C.J.; Hoogerhout, P.; Bonvin, A.M.; Kuipers, B.; Brugghe, H.; Timmermans, H.; Haseley, S.R.; van Alphen, L.; Gros, P. Immunogenicity of peptide-vaccine candidates predicted bymolecular dynamics simulations. J. Mol. Biol., 2003, 328, 1083-1089.
99. Lapelosa, M.; Gallicchio, E.; Arnold, G.F.; Arnold, E.; Levy, R.M. In silico vaccine design based on molecular simulations ofrhinovirus chimeras presenting HIV-1 gp41 epitopes. J. Mol. Biol.,2009, 385, 675-691.
100. Lorenzo, B.; Duccio, F.; Francesco, P.; Paolo De Los, R.; Michel, S.; Ulf, S. A dynamical study of antibody-antigen encounterreactions. Phys. Biol., 2007, 4, 172-180.
101. Orlewski, P.; Marraud, M.; Cung, M.T.; Tsikaris, V.; Sakarellos-Daitsiotis, M.; Sakarellos, C.; Vatzaki, E.; Tzartos, S.J. Comparedstructures of the free nicotinic acetylcholine receptor mainimmunogenic region (MIR) decapeptide and the antibody-bound [A76]MIR analogue: a molecular dynamics simulation from two-dimensional NMR data. Biopolymers, 1996, 40, 419-432.
102. Tsikaris, V.; Detsikas, E.; Sakarellos-Daitsiotis, M.; Sakarellos, C.; Vatzaki, E.; Tzartos, S.J.; Marraud, M.; Cung, M.T. Conformational requirements for molecular recognition ofacetylcholine receptor main immunogenic region (MIR) analoguesby monoclonal anti-MIR antibody: a two-dimensional nuclearmagnetic resonance and molecular dynamics approach. Biopolymers, 1993, 33, 1123-1134.
103. Kleinjung, J.; Petit, M.-C.; Orlewski, P.; Mamalaki, A.; Tzartos, S.J.; Tsikaris, V.; Sakarellos-Daitsiotis, M.; Sakarellos, C.; Marraud, M.; Cung, M.-T. The third-dimensional structure of thecomplex between an Fv antibody fragment and an analogue of themain immunogenic region of the acetylcholine receptor: acombined two-dimensional NMR, homology, and molecularmodeling approachg. Biopolymers, 2000, 53, 113-128.
104. Wilson, I.A. Antibody-antigen interactions: new structures and newconformational changes. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol., 1994, 4, 857-867.
105. van Regenmortel, M.H. Antigenicity and immunogenicity ofsynthetic peptides. Biologicals, 2001, 29, 209-213.
106. Mahler, M.; Bluthner, M.; Pollard, K.M. Advances in B-cellepitope analysis of autoantigens in connective tissue diseases. Clin.Immunol., 2003, 107, 65-79.
107. Camacho, C.J.; Katsumata, Y.; Ascherman, D.P. Structural andthermodynamic approach to peptide immunogenicity. PLoSComput. Biol., 2008, 4, e100231.
108. van der Ley, P.; Heckels, J.; Virji, M.; Hoogerhout, P.; Pollman, J.T. Topology of outer membrane porins in pathogenic Neisseria.Infect. Immun., 1991, 59, 2963-2971.
109. van der Elsen, J.; Herron, J.N.; Hoogerhout, P.; Pollman, J.T.; Boel, E.; Logtenberg, T. Bactericidal antibody recognition of aPorA epitope of Neisseria meningitis: crystal structure of a Fabfragment in complex with a fluerescein-conjugated peptide. Proteins: Struct. Funct. Genet., 1997, 29, 113-125.
110. Ramirez-Alvarado, M.; Blanco, F.J.; Niemann, H.; Serrano, L. Role of the beta-turn residues in the beta-hairpin formaton andstability in designed pepides. J. Mol. Biol., 1997, 273, 898-912.
111. Ramirez-Alvarado, M.; Kortemme, T.; Blanco, F.J.; Serrano, L. Beta-hairpin and beta-sheet formation in designed linear peptides.Bioorg. Med. Chem., 1999, 7, 93-103.
112. Christodoulides, M.; McGuiness, B.T.; Heckels, J.E. Immunizationwith synthetic peptides containing epitopes of the class 1 outer-membrane protein of Neisseria meningitis: production ofbactericidal antibodies on immunization with a cyclic peptide. J.Gen. Microbiol., 1993, 139, 1729-1738.
113. Kee, K.S.; Jois, S.D. Design of beta-turn based therapeutic agents. Curr. Pharm. Des., 2003, 9, 1209-1224.
114. Oomen, C.J.; Hoogerhout, P.; Kuipers, B.; Vidarsson, G.; VanAlphen, L.; Gros, P. Crystal structure of an anti-meningococcalsubtype P1.4 PorA antibody provides basis for peptide-vaccinedesign. J. Mol. Biol., 2005, 351, 1070-1080.
115. Almagro, J.C.; Fransson, J. Humanization of antibodies. Front.Biosci., 2008, 13, 1619-1633.
116. Domagala, A.; Kurpisz, M. CD52 antigen - a review. Med. Sci.Monit., 2001, 7, 325-331.
117. Schmouder, R.L. Immunosuppressive therapies for the twenty-firstcentury. Transpl. Proc., 2000, 32, 1463-1467.
118. Dumont, F.J. CAMPATH (alemtuzumab) for the treatment ofchronic lymphocytic leukemia and beyond. Exp. Rev. AnticancerTher., 2002, 2, 23-35.
119. James, L.C.; Hale, G.; Waldmann, H.; Bloomer, A.C. 1.9 Astructure of the therapeutic antibody CAMPATH-1H fab incomplex with a synthetic peptide antigen. J. Mol. Biol., 1999, 289,293-301.
120. Tatsis, V.A.; Tsoulos, I.G.; Stavrakoudis, A. Molecular dynamicssimulations of the TSSPSAD peptide antigen in free and boundwith CAMPATH-1H Fab antibody states: the importance of the -turn conformation. Int. J. Pept. Res. Ther., 2009, 15, 1-7.
121. Stavrakoudis, A. Computational modelling and moleculardynamics simulations of a cycliccpeptide mimotope of the CD52antigen complexed with CAMPATH-1H antibody. Mol. Simul.,2010, 26, 127-137.
122. Zhang, L.; Mallik, B.; Morikis, D. Immunophysical exploration ofC3d-CR2(CCP1-2) interaction using molecular dynamics andelectrostatics. J. Mol. Biol., 2007, 369, 567-583.
123. Haspel, N.; Ricklin, D.; Geisbrecht, B.V.; Kavraki, L.E.; Lambris, J.D. Electrostatic contributions drive the interaction betweenStaphylococcus aureus protein Efb-C and its complement targetC3d. Protein Sci., 2008, 16, 1894-1906.
124. Ng, S.C.; Gururaj Rao, A.; Zack Howard, O.M.; Sodetz, J.M. Theeighth component of human complement: Evidence that it is anoligomeric serum protein assembled from products of threedifferent genes. Biochemistry, 1987, 26, 5229-5233.
125. Plumb, M.E.; Sodetz, J.M. An indel within the C8 alpha subunit ofhuman complement C8 mediates intracellular binding of C8gamma and formation of C8 alpha-gamma. Biochemistry, 2000, 39,13078-13083.
126. Lovelace, L.L.; Chiswell, B.; Slade, D.J.; Sodetz, J.M.; Lebioda, L. Crystal structure of complement protein C8gamma in complex witha peptide containing the C8gamma binding site on C8alpha:implications for C8gamma ligand binding. Mol. Immunol., 2008,45, 750-756.
127. Stavrakoudis, A. A disulfide linked model of the complementprotein C8 complexed with C8 indel peptide. J. Mol. Model.,2009, 15, 165-171.
128. Slade, D.J.; Lovelace, L.L.; Chruszcz, M.; Minor, W.; Lebioda, L.; Sodetz, J.M. Crystal structure of the MACPF domain of humancomplement protein C8alpha in complex with the C8gammasubunit. J. Mol Biol., 2008, 379, 331-342.