Biology subjects

Smorodina, E.

Publications and source records attributed to Smorodina, E..

6 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2026

Effects of protein interface mutations on protein quality and affinity

Accurately modeling antibody-antigen interactions requires distinguishing intrinsic binding affinity ("protein-interaction") from protein biophysical properties ("protein-quality"), including folding, stability, and expression. However, high-throughput mutational measurements commonly used to train and benchmark computational models often conflate these effects, obscuring the true determinants of molecular recognition. Here, we present an experimental and analytical framework to disentangle protein-interaction effects from protein-quality effects in single-domain antibody (VHH)-antigen binding. Using a large-scale deep mutational scanning (DMS) dataset spanning four VHH-antigen complexes, with single and double mutations in both partners, we introduce control binders to quantify protein-quality changes independently of protein-interaction. This enables decomposition of experimentally measured affinity into protein-interaction and protein-quality components at scale. Leveraging the disentangled dataset, we evaluated state-of-the-art structure- and sequence-based models for protein-quality and protein-interaction prediction and show that their performance largely reflects protein-quality rather than protein-interaction effects. Our results highlight a major confounder in current datasets and suggest that accounting for protein-quality will be essential for training next-generation affinity-prediction models. Nomenclature Antibody related termsO_LIPrimary VHH: The VHH of a VHH-antigen complex for which the paratope and the epitope weremutated. C_LIO_LIControl VHH: A second VHH that binds to the same antigen as the primary VHH but has non-overlapping epitope positions and therefore does not bind to any of the mutated antigen positions. C_LI Affinity-related termsO_LIReal Affinity: "The strength of the interaction between two [...] molecules that bind reversibly (interact)" 1. In the context of antibody-antigen binding, it quantifies interactions between active proteins (which are expressed and correctly folded 2 and are therefore functionally and biologically active (see below). It is commonly quantified by the equilibrium dissociation constant, KD. C_LIO_LIObserved affinity ({degrees}KD): The interaction strength experimentally measured between two molecules. Unlike real affinity, this value is confounded by the biophysical properties of the individual binding partners, specifically their folding, stability, and expression levels. Consequently, the observed affinity often differs from the real/intrinsic affinity if a significant fraction of the protein population is inactive 3. NOTE: Unless otherwise specified, {degrees}KD is reported in - log10 space. For example, a {degrees}KD of -9 corresponds to 10-9M or 1nM. C_LIO_LIChange in observed affinity ({Delta}{degrees}KD): The shift in the observed affinity between two proteins upon mutation, reported as the log10-transformed fold change. A value of 1 reflects a 10-fold difference, a value of 2 a 100-fold difference, etc. This aggregate change resolves into two distinct biophysical components 2, 4: O_LIProtein-interaction change: The change in the intrinsic thermodynamic affinity between the two binding partners, each in its active state (i.e., the specific change in interface Gibbs free energy because both enthalpy and entropy are considered). C_LIO_LIProtein-quality change: The change in the fraction of the mutated protein population that is biologically active - meaning it is expressed, correctly folded, and stable 2, 5. O_LIFolding: The process that guides the polypeptide chain toward its native conformation, which is a prerequisite for forming a functional binding site. C_LIO_LIStability: The thermodynamic capacity to maintain the folded structure over time and under physiological conditions. Stability (decrease in Gibbs free energy from the unfolded to the folded state) ensures the binding interface remains intact and prevents competing processes such as aggregation 6. C_LIO_LIExpression: The steady-state abundance of the protein. This is largely dependent on proper folding and stability, as cellular quality control mechanisms degrade proteins that fail to fold or remain stable at functional concentrations. C_LI C_LI C_LIO_LIChange in relative affinity ({Delta}{Delta}{degrees}KD): the difference between the {Delta}{degrees}KD of the primary VHH compared to the control VHH for a given epitope mutation. C_LI Model-related termsO_LIESM-IF1 sc: Single-chain (sc) structure-conditioned inverse folding model (ESM-IF1), using the isolated monomer structure of the mutated protein: either the VHH or the antigen 7. C_LIO_LIESM-IF1 mc: Multi-chain (mc) structure-conditioned model (ESM-IF1), using the full complex structure (both antibody and antigen) 7. C_LIO_LIStability prediction score: Score that represents the predicted change in stability based on a single mutation, normally represented as {Delta}{Delta}G. C_LI

molecular biology↗

bioRxiv2026

Structural Plausibility Without Binding Specificity: Limits of AI-Based Antibody-Antigen Structure Prediction Confidence Scores

Antibody-antigen binding prediction remains a central challenge for AI-driven therapeutic discovery, particularly in discriminating cognate interactions from structurally plausible but incorrect pairings. We present a controlled, AI-method- and antibody-format-agnostic evaluation framework that measures binding specificity under realistic conditions. Using 106 experimentally determined single-chain antibody (nanobody)-antigen complexes and 11,342 shuffled non-cognate pairings, we benchmarked publicly-available state-of-the-art structure prediction methods (AlphaFold3, Boltz-2, Chai-1). Although the methods tested often generated geometrically plausible complexes, internal confidence metrics (ipTM) frequently failed to discriminate correct from incorrect pairings. Increased sampling improved structural refinement but not pairing discrimination, indicating that computational resources are better allocated across independent seeds and explicit negative controls. We conclude that internal confidence scores are not inherently calibrated to binding specificity and require validation against realistic decoys. To enable community benchmarking and method development, we release [~]1.8 million AI-generated complex structures and guidance for the benchmarks ahead.

bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2026

Disulphide and sequence-encoded conformational priors guide nanobody structure prediction

Nanobody binding is largely governed by the HCDR3 loop, which adopts distinct placement regimes relative to the framework: compact, framework-contacting (kinked blueprint) and solvent-exposed (extended blueprint). Many nanobodies also contain additional cysteines that form non-canonical disulphide bonds, imposing covalent constraints on binding-loop conformations. Current structure predictors are typically trained and benchmarked with smooth coordinate-based objectives, so models may appear reasonable under root-mean-square deviation (RMSD), while adopting an incorrect HCDR3 blueprint or failing to recover the native disulphide connectivity, impacting paratope geometry and functional interpretation. Here, we show that the HCDR3 blueprint is predictable from sequence alone, allowing for explicit constraints during modelling. We implement these principles into NbForge, a lightweight nanobody folding model that incorporates blueprint- and disulphide-aware inductive biases and is trained with filtered self-distillation. NbForge improves recovery of HCDR3 blueprint and non-canonical disulphide formation over previous lightweight models and achieves coordinate accuracy at par to state-of-the-art, large, resource-intensive predictors, while running at sub-second inference speed. We show that using NbForge monomer models as templates further improves the success rate of predicting nanobody-antigen complexes. Together, these results motivate blueprint- and disulphide-aware benchmarks for nanobody modelling beyond RMSD, and show that appropriate inductive biases can close the performance gap to heavyweight predictors. We make the sequence classifier (NbFrame) and NbForge available for download and via a user-friendly web server.

bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2025

Improving nanobody structure prediction with self-distillation

Nanobodies are increasingly attractive therapeutic and biotechnological molecules, yet accurate structure prediction of their highly variable H-CDR3 loops remains a central challenge for machine learning models. Here, we investigate whether nanobody-specific structure prediction can be improved through curated synthetic data strategies. We systematically evaluate different data augmentation regimes, including self-distillation from unlabelled VHH sequences. To ensure structural plausibility of synthetic training samples, we develop NanoKink, the first sequence-based classifier of kinked versus extended H-CDR3 conformations, and apply stringent filtering criteria for non-canonical disulfide bond placement and confor-mational accuracy. On a curated benchmark enriched for challenging nanobody features, we show that, for a fixed training compute budget, a nanobody-specific model trained with filtered synthetic data significantly improves over baseline models and NanobodyBuilder2, achieving lower mean H-CDR3 RMSD and fewer structural violations, while remaining competitive with AlphaFold3 at approximately two orders of magnitude lower per-structure inference time. Our results highlight promising directions in synthetic data generation for nanobody structure modelling and provide a practical framework for optimisation of VHH structure prediction models.

bioengineering↗

bioRxiv2024

Assessing AF2's ability to predict structural ensembles of proteins

Recent breakthroughs in protein structure prediction have enhanced the precision and speed at which protein configurations can be determined, setting new benchmarks for accuracy and efficiency in the field. However, the fundamental mechanisms of biological processes at a molecular level are often connected to conformational changes of proteins. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations serve as a crucial tool for capturing the conformational space of proteins, providing valuable insights into their structural fluctuations. However, the scope of MD simulations is often limited by the accessible timescales and the computational resources available, posing challenges to comprehensively exploring protein behaviors. Recently emerging approaches have focused on expanding the capability of AlphaFold2 (AF2) to predict conformational substates of protein structures by manipulating the input multiple sequence alignment (MSA). These approaches operate under the assumption that the MSA also contains information about the heterogeneity of protein structures. Here, we benchmark the performance of various workflows that have adapted AF2 for ensemble prediction focusing on the subsampling of the MSA as implemented in ColabFold and compare the obtained structures with ensembles obtained from MD simulations and NMR. As test cases, we chose four proteins namely the bovine pancreatic inhibitor protein (BPTI), thrombin and two antigen binding fragments (antibody Fv and nanobody), for which reliable experimentally validated structural information (X-ray and/or NMR) was available. Thus, we provide an overview of the levels of performance and accessible timescales that can currently be achieved with machine learning (ML) based ensemble generation. In three out of the four test cases, we find structural variations fall within the predicted ensembles. Nevertheless, significant minima of the free energy surfaces remain undetected. This study highlights the possibilities and pitfalls when generating ensembles with AF2 and thus may guide the development of future tools while informing upon the results of currently available applications.

biophysics↗

bioRxiv2023

Cartography of the developability landscapes of native and human-engineered antibodies

Designing effective monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapeutics faces a multi-parameter optimization challenge known as "developability", which reflects an antibodys ability to progress through development stages based on its physicochemical properties. While natural antibodies may provide valuable guidance for mAb selection, we lack a comprehensive understanding of natural developability parameter (DP) plasticity (redundancy, predictability, sensitivity) and how the DP landscapes of human-engineered and natural antibodies relate to one another. These gaps hinder fundamental developability profile cartography. To chart natural and engineered DP landscapes, we computed 40 sequence- and 46 structure-based DPs of over two million native and human-engineered single-chain antibody sequences. We found lower redundancy among structure-based compared to sequence-based DPs. Sequence DP sensitivity to single amino acid substitutions varied by antibody region and DP, and structure DP values varied across the conformational ensemble of antibody structures. Sequence DPs were more predictable than structure-based ones across different machine-learning tasks and embeddings, indicating a constrained sequence-based design space. Human-engineered antibodies were localized within the developability and sequence landscapes of natural antibodies, suggesting that human-engineered antibodies explore mere subspaces of the natural one. Our work quantifies the plasticity of antibody developability, providing a fundamental resource for multi-parameter therapeutic mAb design.

bioinformatics↗