Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19523227›Full record

ArticleBMC chemical biology2009

Bioinformatic analysis of xenobiotic reactive metabolite target proteins and their interacting partners.

Jianwen Fang, Yakov M Koen, Robert P Hanzlik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC chemical biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Improving the chances of successful protein structure determination with a random forest classifier.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Biological crystallography · 2014
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Bioinformatic analysis of 302 reactive metabolite target proteins. Which ones are important for cell death?Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2013
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Modulatory profiling identifies mechanisms of small molecule-induced cell death.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2011
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jianwen FangDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA. jwfang@ku.edu
Yakov M Koen
Robert P Hanzlik

Funding

UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF SMALL RNAS IN ARABIDOPSIS POLLEN DEVELOPMENTP20RR016475 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI ACKLEY, BRIAN DOUGLAS · 2001 to 2011
$38.1M
ROLE OF EPOXIDES IN METABOLISM AND DRUG TOXICITYR01GM021784 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS LAWRENCE · PI HANZLIK, ROBERT P · 1985 to 2012
$2.9M
NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR016475NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM021784
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProtein covalent binding by reactive metabolites of drugs, chemicals and natural products can lead to acute cytotoxicity. Recent rapid progress in reactive metabolite target protein identification has shown that adduction is surprisingly selective and inspired the hope that analysis of target proteins might reveal protein factors that differentiate target- vs. non-target proteins and illuminate mechanisms connecting covalent binding to cytotoxicity.

resultsSorting 171 known reactive metabolite target proteins revealed a number of GO categories and KEGG pathways to be significantly enriched in targets, but in most cases the classes were too large, and the "percent coverage" too small, to allow meaningful conclusions about mechanisms of toxicity. However, a similar analysis of the directlyinteracting partners of 28 common targets of multiple reactive metabolites revealed highly significant enrichments in terms likely to be highly relevant to cytotoxicity (e.g., MAP kinase pathways, apoptosis, response to unfolded protein). Machine learning was used to rank the contribution of 211 computed protein features to determining protein susceptibility to adduction. Protein lysine (but not cysteine) content and protein instability index (i.e., rate of turnover in vivo) were among the features most important to determining susceptibility.

conclusionAs yet there is no good explanation for why some low-abundance proteins become heavily adducted while some abundant proteins become only lightly adducted in vivo. Analyzing the directly interacting partners of target proteins appears to yield greater insight into mechanisms of toxicity than analyzing target proteins per se. The insights provided can readily be formulated as hypotheses to test in future experimental studies.

Identifiers

PMID19523227
PMCPMC2711050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.