ArticleBMC bioinformatics2012
Constructing patch-based ligand-binding pocket database for predicting function of proteins.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- SHREC 2025: Protein surface shape retrieval including electrostatic potential.Computers & graphics · 2025Article
- Article
- Impact of structural prior knowledge in SNV prediction: Towards causal variant finding in rare disease.PloS one · 2018Article
- PatchSurfers: Two methods for local molecular property-based binding ligand prediction.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2016Article
- PL-PatchSurfer: a novel molecular local surface-based method for exploring protein-ligand interactions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2014Article
- Fitting multimeric protein complexes into electron microscopy maps using 3D Zernike descriptors.The journal of physical chemistry. B · 2012Article
- Structure- and sequence-based function prediction for non-homologous proteins.Journal of structural and functional genomics · 2012Article
- Detecting local ligand-binding site similarity in nonhomologous proteins by surface patch comparison.Proteins · 2012Article
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
backgroundMany of solved tertiary structures of unknown functions do not have global sequence and structural similarities to proteins of known function. Often functional clues of unknown proteins can be obtained by predicting small ligand molecules that bind to the proteins.
methodsIn our previous work, we have developed an alignment free local surface-based pocket comparison method, named Patch-Surfer, which predicts ligand molecules that are likely to bind to a protein of interest. Given a query pocket in a protein, Patch-Surfer searches a database of known pockets and finds similar ones to the query. Here, we have extended the database of ligand binding pockets for Patch-Surfer to cover diverse types of binding ligands. RESULTS AND
conclusionWe selected 9393 representative pockets with 2707 different ligand types from the Protein Data Bank. We tested Patch-Surfer on the extended pocket database to predict binding ligand of 75 non-homologous proteins that bind one of seven different ligands. Patch-Surfer achieved the average enrichment factor at 0.1 percent of over 20.0. The results did not depend on the sequence similarity of the query protein to proteins in the database, indicating that Patch-Surfer can identify correct pockets even in the absence of known homologous structures in the database.
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.