ReviewJournal of molecular neuroscience : MN2005
New methods for researching accessory proteins.
Review in Journal of molecular neuroscience : MN, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- AHR activated placental adrenomedullin: A plausible factor in smoke-induced preeclampsia protection.Placenta · 2025Article
- Elucidating the Interactome of G Protein-Coupled Receptors and Receptor Activity-Modifying Proteins.Pharmacological reviews · 2023Review
- Accelerated Development With Increased Bone Mass and Skeletal Response to Loading Suggest Receptor Activity Modifying Protein-3 as a Bone Anabolic Target.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Article
- GPCRs globally coevolved with receptor activity-modifying proteins, RAMPs.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017Article
- Intramembrane receptor-receptor interactions: a novel principle in molecular medicine.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2007Review
- Evolution of secretin family GPCR members in the metazoa.BMC evolutionary biology · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Receptor activity-modifying proteins (RAMPs) control the pharmacology of the receptors for the calcitonin family of peptide hormones. There are five of these peptides: calcitonin, calcitonix/calcitixin gene-related peptide (CGRP), adrenomedullin, amylin, and now adrenomedullin 2. The calcitonin receptor is specific for calcitonin when expressed alone but it can function as an amylin or CGRP receptor when co-expressed with a RAMP. The calcitonin receptor-like receptor (CRLR) will not reach the cell surface without any one of the three RAMP proteins to function as either a CGRP or adrenomedullin receptor. This system was discovered more than 6 yr ago. At the time, it was reasonable to think that nature would employ accessory proteins, such as the RAMPs, to enable flexible signaling systems for other ligand families and that these would be discovered in time. In reality, many more new peptide ligands have been discovered than accessory proteins. Why is this? Developments in bioinformatics facilitate the discovery of both seven transmembrane ligands and accessory proteins. Proteomics and transcriptomics can be used together to define likely accessory proteins that can be experimentally tested. Comparative genomics was used in the discovery of adrenomedullin 2. The existence of multiple RAMPs within several species of fish suggests an alternative endocrinology. Finally, genetics offers a direct view of receptors, ligands, and accessory proteins in human disease--either as causative or contributing factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16012200What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.