Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24061228›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Molecular cell biology2013

Protein rescue from aggregates by powerful molecular chaperone machines.

Shannon M Doyle, Olivier Genest, Sue Wickner

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 120 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
120citing 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

120 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Evolution of N-terminal mechanical lability as a determinant for Type III secretion.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Knockout Mutants ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Anticancer Therapeutic Strategies Targeting p53 Aggregation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  18. Review
  19. LRRK2 and Proteostasis in Parkinson's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  20. Article

60 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Shannon M DoyleLaboratory of Molecular Biology, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 37 Convent Drive, Bldg. 37, Room 5144, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.
Olivier Genest
Sue Wickner

Funding

Molecular Chaperones and DNA ReplicationZIABC008710 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI WICKNER, SUE H · 2009 to 2025
$24.5M
Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein quality control within the cell requires the interplay of many molecular chaperones and proteases. When this quality control system is disrupted, polypeptides follow pathways leading to misfolding, inactivity and aggregation. Among the repertoire of molecular chaperones are remarkable proteins that forcibly untangle protein aggregates, called disaggregases. Structural and biochemical studies have led to new insights into how these proteins collaborate with co-chaperones and utilize ATP to power protein disaggregation. Understanding how energy-dependent protein disaggregating machines function is universally important and clinically relevant, as protein aggregation is linked to medical conditions such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, amyloidosis and prion diseases.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseAmyloidosisHumansMolecular ChaperonesParkinson DiseasePeptide HydrolasesPrion DiseasesProtein ConformationProtein FoldingProteinsProtein UnfoldingQuality ControlMolecular ChaperonesPeptide HydrolasesProteins

Identifiers

PMID24061228

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.