ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2012
A novel view of modelling interactions between synthetic and biological polymers via docking.
Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Molecular dynamics modeling the synthetic and biological polymers interactions pre-studied via docking: anchors modified polyanions interference with the HIV-1 fusion mediator.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2014Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multipoint interactions between synthetic and natural polymers provide a promising platform for many topical applications, including therapeutic blockage of virus-specific targets. Docking may become a useful tool for modelling of such interactions. However, the rigid docking cannot be correctly applied to synthetic polymers with flexible chains. The application of flexible docking to these polymers as whole macromolecule ligands is also limited by too many possible conformations. We propose to solve this problem via stepwise flexible docking. Step 1 is docking of separate polymer components: (1) backbone units (BU), multi-repeated along the chain, and (2) side groups (SG) consisting of functionally active elements (SG(F)) and bridges (SG(B)) linking SG(F) with BU. At this step, probable binding sites locations and binding energies for the components are scored. Step 2 is docking of component-integrating models: [BU](m), SG = SG(F)-SG(B), BU-SG, BU-BU(SG)-BU, BU(SG)-[BU](m)-BU(SG), and [BU(var)(SG(var))](m). Every modelling level yields new information, including how the linkage of various components influences on the ligand-target contacts positioning, orientation, and binding energy in step-by-step approximation to polymeric ligand motifs. Step 3 extrapolates the docking results to real-scale macromolecules. This approach has been demonstrated by studying the interactions between hetero-SG modified anionic polymers and the N-heptad repeat region tri-helix core of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) envelope glycoprotein gp41, the key mediator of HIV-1 fusion during virus entry. The docking results are compared to real polymeric compounds, acting as HIV-1 entry inhibitors in vitro. This study clarifies the optimal macromolecular design for the viral fusion inhibition and drug resistance prevention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23239170What 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.