tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1136153439451224584.post7052536715559841421..comments2024-03-27T06:45:59.174-07:00Comments on Practical Fragments: Fragments vs PRMT6Dr. Teddy Zhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07288045760981372367noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1136153439451224584.post-41573543495961672882016-02-25T01:35:36.246-08:002016-02-25T01:35:36.246-08:00Interesting paper. The completion could potentiall...Interesting paper. The completion could potentially be improved. Looking at their data I might make a case for the compounds being Partially Uncompetitive rather than non-competitive as it seems to my eye that the IC50 decreases with substrate concentration (and saturates at a bout a 3 fold increase in potency when substrate binding sites are saturated) but the compound is able to bind in the absence of substrate. This mechanism might make sense for a compound which binds adjacent from to SAM and also sits within, but not covering the peptide binding pocket as it could potentially make further interactions with SAM and the peptide.<br /><br />What irks me about this is that the models to properly determine mechanism are available in Graphpad Prism, which the authors have used to make their figures. <br /><br />However I have no doubt the data are real, and it's an interesting find worthy of publication.P.San.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10899931407179799130noreply@blogger.com