Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22272100›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2011

Combined pharmacophore modeling, docking, and 3D-QSAR studies of PLK1 inhibitors.

Shuai Lu, Hai-Chun Liu, Ya-Dong Chen, Hao-Liang Yuan, Shan-Liang Sun, Yi-Ping Gao, Pei Yang, Liang Zhang, Tao Lu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors.

Shuai LuLaboratory of Molecular Design and Drug Discovery, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211169, China. luai071@163.com
Hai-Chun Liu
Ya-Dong Chen
Hao-Liang Yuan
Shan-Liang Sun
Yi-Ping Gao
Pei Yang
Liang Zhang
Tao Lu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polo-like kinase 1, an important enzyme with diverse biological actions in cell mitosis, is a promising target for developing novel anticancer drugs. A combined molecular docking, structure-based pharmacophore modeling and three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship (3D-QSAR) study was performed on a set of 4,5-dihydro-1H-pyrazolo[4,3-h]quinazoline derivatives as PLK1 inhibitors. The common substructure, molecular docking and pharmacophore-based alignment were used to develop different 3D-QSAR models. The comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA) and comparative molecule similarity indices analysis (CoMSIA) models gave statistically significant results. These models showed good q(2) and r(2) (pred) values and revealed a good response to test set validation. All of the structural insights obtained from the 3D-QSAR contour maps are consistent with the available crystal structure of PLK1. The contour maps obtained from the 3D-QSAR models in combination with the structure based pharmacophore model help to better interpret the structure-activity relationship. These satisfactory results may aid the design of novel PLK1 inhibitors. This is the first report on 3D-QSAR study of PLK1 inhibitors.

Indexed as

Molecular Docking SimulationQuantitative Structure-Activity RelationshipAmino Acid SequenceBinding SitesCell Cycle ProteinsEnzyme InhibitorsHumansMolecular Sequence DataPolo-Like Kinase 1Protein BindingProtein Serine-Threonine KinasesProto-Oncogene ProteinsCell Cycle ProteinsEnzyme InhibitorsPolo-Like Kinase 1Protein Serine-Threonine KinasesProto-Oncogene Proteins3D-QSARmolecular dockingpharmacophorePLK1

Identifiers

PMID22272100
PMCPMC3257097

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.