Skip to main content
. 2019 Nov 8;9:16379. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-52852-9

Table 1.

Results of docking simulations of ruxolitinib binding to HSA.

Site Free energy (kcal × mol−1) Hydrophobic interactions Hydrogen bonds
FA9 −8.0 His146, Lys190, Ala191, Ala194, Arg197, Glu425, Asn429, Lys432, Val456, Leu463 Asp108, Val455, Gln459
−7.6 Asp108, His146, Lys190, Ala191, Ala194, Arg197, Glu425, Asn429, Lys432,Val456, Gln459, Leu463, Asp108, Ser193, Tyr452
FA1 −7.8 Asp108, Asn109, Pro110, Arg145, His146, Pro147, Ser193, Arg197, Glu425 Lys190
−7.6 Asn109, Pro110, Leu112, Arg145, His146, Pro147, Ser193, Ala194, Glu425 Asp108, Arg145
−7.3 Asp108, Arg145, His146, Pro147, Tyr148, Lys190, Ser193, Ala194, Arg197, Glu425 Asp108
−7.2 Leu115, Phe134, Lys137, Tyr138, Glu141, Ile142, Tyr161, Arg186 Tyr138, Tyr161
−7.2 Leu115, Phe134, Lys137, Tyr138, Ile142, Tyr161, Arg186 Phe134, Tyr161
FA6 −7.7 Arg209, Lys212, Ala213, Val216, Ser232, Val235, Leu327, Asp324, Ala350, Glu354 Arg209, Asp324, Glu354
FA7 −7.1 Leu103, Glu100, Gln104, Arg197, Gln204, Lys205. Val462 Tyr148, Glu465