Table 1 Docking score analysis of Survivin interaction with cIAP1 and NAIP.

From: Restoring apoptosis in breast cancer via peptide mediated disruption of survivin IAP interaction

Energy (Kcal/mol)

Cluster

Members

Representative

Weighted score

A

BIR1

0

102

Center

 − 657.8

0

102

Lowest energy

 − 751.9

1

93

Center

 − 670.8

1

93

Lowest energy

 − 728.5

2

84

Center

 − 768.7

2

84

Lowest energy

 − 857

3

83

Center

 − 693.1

3

83

Lowest energy

 − 717.8

B

BIR2

0

236

Center

 − 705.2

0

236

Lowest energy

 − 848.8

1

71

Center

 − 735.4

1

71

Lowest energy

 − 735.4

2

64

Center

 − 634.2

2

64

Lowest energy

 − 787.1

3

60

Center

 − 628.5

3

60

Lowest energy

 − 701.5

C

BIR3

0

191

Center

 − 710.7

0

191

Lowest energy

 − 749.2

1

136

Center

 − 735.1

1

136

Lowest energy

 − 735.1

2

127

Center

 − 677.8

2

127

Lowest energy

 − 778

3

89

Center

 − 618.6

3

89

Lowest energy

 − 710.5

D

CARD

0

117

Center

 − 634.8

0

117

Lowest energy

 − 778.4

1

108

Center

 − 735.2

1

108

Lowest energy

 − 765.2

2

92

Center

 − 690.7

2

92

Lowest energy

 − 774.1

3

65

Center

 − 627.2

3

65

Lowest energy

 − 745.4

E

RING

0

121

Center

 − 694.7

0

121

Lowest energy

 − 780.5

1

71

Center

 − 653.1

1

71

Lowest energy

 − 775

2

64

Center

 − 661.2

2

64

Lowest energy

 − 777.5

3

50

Center

 − 659.4

3

50

Lowest energy

 − 744.6

F

Full − length CIAP1

0

112

Center

 − 904.4

0

112

Lowest energy

 − 904.4

1

89

Center

 − 896.1

1

89

Lowest energy

 − 896.1

2

77

Center

 − 822.5

2

77

Lowest energy

 − 831.5

3

74

Center

 − 832.9

3

74

Lowest energy

 − 989.1

G

Full − length NAIP

0

94

Center

 − 833.2

0

94

Lowest energy

 − 992.7

1

58

Center

 − 758.3

1

58

Lowest energy

 − 964.6

2

49

Center

 − 768.4

2

49

Lowest energy

 − 820.2

3

42

Center

 − 793.2

3

42

Lowest energy

 − 932.1

  1. (a) Survivin–BIR1 domain of cIAP1; (b) Survivin–BIR2 domain of cIAP1; (c) Survivin–BIR3 domain of cIAP1; (d) Survivin–CARD domain of cIAP1; (e) Survivin–RING domain of cIAP1; (f) Survivin–full-length structure of cIAP1; (g) Survivin–full-length structure of NAIP. According to the results, all models in cluster 0 exhibited interactions with favorable scores and higher frequency compared to other clusters.