Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21562823›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular modeling2012

CYP isoform specificity toward drug metabolism: analysis using common feature hypothesis.

M Ramesh, Prasad V Bharatam

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of molecular modeling, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M RameshDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), Sector-67, S. A. S Nagar, Mohali 160 062, India.
Prasad V Bharatam
National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three dimensional pharmacophoric maps were generated for each isoforms of CYP2C9, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4 separately using independent training sets consist of highly potent substrates (seven substrates for each isoform). HipHop module of CATALYST software was used in the generation of pharmacophore models. The best pharmacophore model was chosen out of the several models on the basis of (i) highest ranking score, (ii) better fit value among training set, (iii) capability to screen substrates from data set and (iv) efficiency to identify the isoform specificity. The individual pharmacophore models (CYP2C9-hypo1, CYP2D6-hypo1 and CYP3A4-hypo1) are characterized by the pharmacophoric features XZDH, RPZH and XYZHH for the CYP2C9, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4 respectively. Each of the chosen models was validated by using data sets of CYP substrates. This comparative study of CYP substrates demonstrates the importance of acidic character along with HBD and HBAl features for CYP2C9, basic character with ring aromatic features for CYP2D6 and hydrophobic features for CYP3A4. Acidity, basicity and hydrophobicity features arising from the functional groups of the substrates are also responsible for demonstrating CYP isoform specificity. Hence, these chemical features are incorporated in the decision tree along with pharmacophore maps. Finally, a decision tree based on chemical features and pharmacophore features was generated to identify the isoform specificity of novel query molecule toward the three isoforms.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularCatalysisComputer SimulationCytochrome P-450 Enzyme SystemDecision TreesIsoenzymesLigandsPharmaceutical PreparationsProtein BindingReproducibility of ResultsSoftwareSubstrate SpecificityCytochrome P-450 Enzyme SystemIsoenzymesLigandsPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID21562823
OpenAlexW1970535328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.