Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24915177›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

A comparison of protein kinases inhibitor screening methods using both enzymatic activity and binding affinity determination.

Amalie Frederikke Rudolf, Tine Skovgaard, Stefan Knapp, Lars Juhl Jensen, Jens Berthelsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Structure-based design of selective, orally available salt-inducible kinase inhibitors that stimulate bone formation in mice.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Amalie Frederikke RudolfNovo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tine SkovgaardNovo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Stefan KnappStructural Genomics Consortium, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Lars Juhl JensenNovo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jens BerthelsenNovo Nordisk Foundation Center for Protein Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; Costerton Biofilm Center, Institute for International Health, Immunology and Microbiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 092809
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Binding assays are increasingly used as a screening method for protein kinase inhibitors; however, as yet only a weak correlation with enzymatic activity-based assays has been demonstrated. We show that the correlation between the two types of assays can be improved using more precise screening conditions. Furthermore a marked improvement in the correlation was found by using kinase constructs containing the catalytic domain in presence of additional domains or subunits.

Indexed as

Drug Evaluation, PreclinicalEnzyme ActivationInhibitory Concentration 50Protein BindingProtein Kinase InhibitorsProtein KinasesSmall Molecule LibrariesProtein Kinase InhibitorsProtein KinasesSmall Molecule Libraries

Identifiers

PMID24915177
PMCPMC4051630

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.