RAS PhysicsКристаллография Crystallography Reports

  • ISSN (Print) 0023-4761
  • ISSN (Online) 3034-5510

CALCULATION OF THE STABILITY OF CANDIDATE VACCINES FOR THE PREVENTION OF DENGUE FEVER AND THEIR COMPLEXES WITH TOLL-LIKE RECEPTORS USING MOLECULAR DYNAMICS

PII
S3034551025060124-1
DOI
10.7868/S3034551025060124
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Volume/ Edition
Volume 70 / Issue number 6
Pages
976-983
Abstract
Rational vaccine design requires not only the prediction of immunogenic epitopes, but also a careful assessment of the structural stability of candidates and their ability to effectively interact with innate immunity receptors. The stability of four candidate vaccines and their complexes with toll-like receptors was assessed using molecular dynamics modeling using the Gromacs-2023 software package. The structures of the complexes of the considered chimeric candidate proteins for the Dengue virus vaccine with extracellular domains (ectodomains) of human toll-like receptors TLR4 and TLR8 were obtained as a result of molecular docking performed by the ZDOCK server. The affinity of the complexes was evaluated using the PRODIGY server.
Keywords
Date of publication
12.09.2025
Year of publication
2025
Number of purchasers
0
Views
6

References

  1. 1. Pourzangiabadi M., Najafi H., Fallah A. et al. // Infect. Genet. Evol. 2025. V. 127. P. 105710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2024.105710
  2. 2. Parvizpour S., Pourseif M.M., Razmara J. et al. // Drug Discovery Today. 2020. V. 25. № 6. P. 1034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2020.03.006
  3. 3. Tulenev A.A., Timofeev V.I., Chernyavsky A.A. et al. // Crystallography Reports. 2025. V. 70. № 3. P. 470. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1063774524602600
  4. 4. Rakitina T.V., Smirnova E.V., Podshivalov D.D. et al. // Crystals. 2023. V. 13. № 10. P. 1416. https://doi.org/10.3390/cryst13101416
  5. 5. Kato K., Nakayoshi T., Fukuyoshi S. et al. // Molecules. 2017. V. 22. № 10. P. 1716. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22101716
  6. 6. Abass O.A., Timofeev V.I., Sarkar B. et al. // J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2021. V. 40. № 16. P. 7283. https://doi.org/10.1080/07391102.2021.1896387
  7. 7. Moin A.T., Singh G., Ahmed N. et al. // J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 2022. V. 41. № 3. P. 833. https://doi.org/10.1080/07391102.2021.2014969
  8. 8. El-Zayat S.R., Sibaii H., Mannaa F.A. // Bull. Natl. Res. Cent. 2019. V. 43. № 1. P. 187. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42269-019-0227-2
  9. 9. Akira S., Takeda K., Kaisho T. // Nat. Immunol. 2001. V. 2. № 8. P. 675. https://doi.org/10.1038/90609
  10. 10. Thada S., Horvath G.L., Müller M.M. et al. // Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021. V. 22. № 4. P. 1560. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22041560
  11. 11. Agu P.C., Afiukwa C.A., Orji O.U. et al. // Sci. Rep. 2023. V. 13. № 1. P. 13398. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40160-2
  12. 12. Vakser I.A. // Biophys. J. 2014. V. 107. № 8. P. 1785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2014.08.033
  13. 13. Paggi J.M., Pandit A., Dror R.O. // Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2024. V. 93. № 1. P. 389. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biochem-030222-120000
  14. 14. Abramson J., Adler J., Dunger J. et al. // Nature. 2024. V. 630. P. 493. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07487-w
  15. 15. Choudhary P., Feng Z., Berrisford J. et al. // Database. 2024. V. 2024. P. baae041. https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baae041
  16. 16. Lindorff-Larsen K., Piana S., Palmo K. et al. // Proteins. 2010. V. 78. № 8. P. 1950. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.22711
  17. 17. Jorgensen W.L., Chandrasekhar J., Madura J.D. et al. // J. Chem. Phys. 1983. V. 79. № 2. P. 926. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.445869
  18. 18. Darden T., York D., Pedersen L. // J. Chem. Phys. 1993. V. 98. № 12. P. 10089. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.464397
  19. 19. Ke Q., Gong X., Liao S. et al. // J. Mol. Liq. 2022. V. 365. P. 120116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2022.120116
  20. 20. Bernetti M., Bussi G. // J. Chem. Phys. 2020. V. 153. № 11. P. 114107. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0020514
  21. 21. Bussi G., Donadio D., Parrinello M. // J. Chem Phys. 2007. V. 126. № 1. P. 014101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2408420
  22. 22. Cuendet M.A., van Gunsteren W.F. // J. Chem. Phys. 2007. V. 127. № 18. P. 18410. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2779878
  23. 23. Pierce B.G., Wiehe K., Hwang H. et al. // Bioinformatics. 2014. V. 30. № 12. P. 1771. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu097
  24. 24. Xue L.C., Rodrigues J.P., Kastritis P.L. et al. // Bioinformatics. 2016. V. 32. № 23. P. 3676. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btw514
QR
Translate

Indexing

Scopus

Scopus

Scopus

Crossref

Scopus

Higher Attestation Commission

At the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Scopus

Scientific Electronic Library