ArticleProteins2012
Predicting flexible loop regions that interact with ligands: the challenge of accurate scoring.
Article in Proteins, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- In silico drug repurposing of potential antiviral inhibitors targeting methyltransferase (2'-O-MTase) domain of Marburg virus.In silico pharmacology · 2025Article
- Discovery of Novel Inhibitors From Medicinal Plants for V-Domain Ig Suppressor of T-Cell Activation.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2021Article
- Conformational sampling in template-free protein loop structure modeling: an overview.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Flexible loop regions play a critical role in the biological function of many proteins and have been shown to be involved in ligand binding. In the context of structure-based drug design, using or predicting an incorrect loop configuration can be detrimental to the study if the loop is capable of interacting with the ligand. Three protein systems, each with at least one flexible loop region in close proximity to the known binding site, were selected for loop prediction using the CorLps program; a six residue loop region from phosphoribosylglycinamide formyltransferase (GART), two nine residue loop regions from cytochrome P450 (CYP) 119, and an 11 residue loop region from enolase were selected for loop prediction. The results of this study indicate that the statistically based DFIRE scoring function implemented in the CorLps program did not accurately rank native-like predicted loop configurations in any protein system. In an attempt to improve the ranking of the native-like predicted loop configurations, the MM/GBSA and the optimized MM/GBSA-dsr scoring functions were used to re-rank the predicted loops with and without bound ligand. In general, single snapshot MM/GBSA scoring provided the best ranking of native-like loop configurations. Based on the scoring function analyses presented, the optimal ranking of native-like loop configurations is still a difficult challenge and the choice of the "best" scoring function appears to be system dependent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.