{"title":"Enthalpy–Entropy Compensation in Inhibitor Binding to Carbonic Anhydrase Isozymes","authors":"Vaida Paketurytė-Latvė,Audrius Zakšauskas,Visvaldas Kairys,Edita Čapkauskaitė,Martynas Bagdonas,Alexey Smirnov,Elena Manakova,Saulius Gražulis,Daumantas Matulis","doi":"10.1016/j.bpj.2026.09.032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Enthalpy–entropy compensation is a widely observed feature of protein–ligand recognition, yet its structural origins remain difficult to resolve. Here, we investigate a matched series of sulfonamide inhibitors binding to three closely related human carbonic anhydrase isozymes (CA II, CA XII, and CA XIII) using isothermal titration calorimetry, fluorescence thermal shift assays, and high-resolution X-ray crystallography. Although these isozymes share nearly identical overall folds and exhibit highly similar intrinsic Gibbs energies of binding, their enthalpic and entropic contributions diverge markedly. Correction of all observed thermodynamic quantities for proton-linked equilibria reveals that this divergence originates from subtle differences in the active-site microenvironment. In particular, single-residue variations—including the Thr/Thr/Val substitution at position 200, the Phe/Ala/Phe variation at position 131, and the Asn/Asn/Ser difference at position 62—modulate hydrogen-bond geometry, steric complementarity, and local solvation, thereby reshaping the balance between enthalpic and entropic driving forces. These results demonstrate how closely related proteins can achieve similar binding affinities through distinct energetic strategies and establish a coherent structure–thermodynamics framework for sulfonamide recognition.","PeriodicalId":8922,"journal":{"name":"Biophysical journal","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biophysical journal","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2026.09.032","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Enthalpy–entropy compensation is a widely observed feature of protein–ligand recognition, yet its structural origins remain difficult to resolve. Here, we investigate a matched series of sulfonamide inhibitors binding to three closely related human carbonic anhydrase isozymes (CA II, CA XII, and CA XIII) using isothermal titration calorimetry, fluorescence thermal shift assays, and high-resolution X-ray crystallography. Although these isozymes share nearly identical overall folds and exhibit highly similar intrinsic Gibbs energies of binding, their enthalpic and entropic contributions diverge markedly. Correction of all observed thermodynamic quantities for proton-linked equilibria reveals that this divergence originates from subtle differences in the active-site microenvironment. In particular, single-residue variations—including the Thr/Thr/Val substitution at position 200, the Phe/Ala/Phe variation at position 131, and the Asn/Asn/Ser difference at position 62—modulate hydrogen-bond geometry, steric complementarity, and local solvation, thereby reshaping the balance between enthalpic and entropic driving forces. These results demonstrate how closely related proteins can achieve similar binding affinities through distinct energetic strategies and establish a coherent structure–thermodynamics framework for sulfonamide recognition.
期刊介绍:
BJ publishes original articles, letters, and perspectives on important problems in modern biophysics. The papers should be written so as to be of interest to a broad community of biophysicists. BJ welcomes experimental studies that employ quantitative physical approaches for the study of biological systems, including or spanning scales from molecule to whole organism. Experimental studies of a purely descriptive or phenomenological nature, with no theoretical or mechanistic underpinning, are not appropriate for publication in BJ. Theoretical studies should offer new insights into the understanding ofexperimental results or suggest new experimentally testable hypotheses. Articles reporting significant methodological or technological advances, which have potential to open new areas of biophysical investigation, are also suitable for publication in BJ. Papers describing improvements in accuracy or speed of existing methods or extra detail within methods described previously are not suitable for BJ.