Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25742599›Full record

ArticleAccounts of chemical research2015

Function through synthesis-informed design.

Paul A Wender, Ryan V Quiroz, Matthew C Stevens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Accounts of chemical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Transforming Molecular Synthesis With Large Language Models.Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. β-Lactams from the Ocean.Marine drugs · 2023
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Late-Stage Diversification: A Motivating Force in Organic Synthesis.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Prodrugs of PKC modulators show enhanced HIV latency reversal and an expanded therapeutic window.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Paul A WenderDepartments of Chemistry and Chemical and Systems Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-5080, United States.
Ryan V QuirozDepartments of Chemistry and Chemical and Systems Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-5080, United States.
Matthew C StevensDepartments of Chemistry and Chemical and Systems Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-5080, United States.

Funding

SYNTHETIC STUDIES RELATED TO CANCER RESEARCH/TREATMENTR01CA031845 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI PAUL Anthony WENDER · 1985 to 2026
$6.9M
SYNTHETIC STUDIES ON TUMOR PROMOTERS AND INHIBITORSR01CA031841 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI WENDER, PAUL ANTHONY · 1985 to 2014
$4.8M
Synthetic Studies Related to Cancer Research/TreatmentR37CA031845 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI WENDER, PAUL ANTHONY · 2006 to 2015
$4.5M
SYNTHETIC STUDIES ON TUMOR PROMOTERS AND INHIBITORSR37CA031841 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI WENDER, PAUL · 1993 to 1999
–
NCI NIH HHS CA031841NCI NIH HHS CA031845NCI NIH HHS R01 CA031841NCI NIH HHS R01 CA031845NCI NIH HHS R37 CA031841NCI NIH HHS R37 CA031845
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 1996, a snapshot of the field of synthesis was provided by many of its thought leaders in a Chemical Reviews thematic issue on "Frontiers in Organic Synthesis". This Accounts of Chemical Research thematic issue on "Synthesis, Design, and Molecular Function" is intended to provide further perspective now from well into the 21st century. Much has happened in the past few decades. The targets, methods, strategies, reagents, procedures, goals, funding, practices, and practitioners of synthesis have changed, some in dramatic ways as documented in impressive contributions to this issue. However, a constant for most synthesis studies continues to be the goal of achieving function with synthetic economy. Whether in the form of new catalysts, reagents, therapeutic leads, diagnostics, drug delivery systems, imaging agents, sensors, materials, energy generation and storage systems, bioremediation strategies, or molecules that challenge old theories or test new ones, the function of a target has been and continues to be a major and compelling justification for its synthesis. While the targets of synthesis have historically been heavily represented by natural products, increasingly design, often inspired by natural structures, is providing a new source of target structures exhibiting new or natural functions and new or natural synthetic challenges. Complementing isolation and screening approaches to new target identification, design enables one to create targets de novo with an emphasis on sought-after function and synthetic innovation with step-economy. Design provides choice. It allows one to determine how close a synthesis will come to the ideal synthesis and how close a structure will come to the ideal function. In this Account, we address studies in our laboratory on function-oriented synthesis (FOS), a strategy to achieve function by design and with synthetic economy. By starting with function rather than structure, FOS places an initial emphasis on target design, thereby harnessing the power of chemists and computers to create new structures with desired functions that could be prepared in a simple, safe, economical, and green, if not ideal, fashion. Reported herein are examples of FOS associated with (a) molecular recognition, leading to the first designed phorbol-inspired protein kinase C regulatory ligands, the first designed bryostatin analogs, the newest bryologs, and a new family of designed kinase inhibitors, (b) target modification, leading to highly simplified but functionally competent photonucleases-molecules that cleave DNA upon photoactivation, (c) drug delivery, leading to cell penetrating molecular transporters, molecules that ferry other attached or complexed molecules across biological barriers, and (d) new reactivity-regenerating reagents in the form of functional equivalents of butatrienes, reagents that allow for back-to-back three-component cycloaddition reactions, thus achieving structural complexity and value with step-economy. While retrosynthetic analysis seeks to identify the best way to make a target, retrofunction analysis seeks to identify the best targets to make. In essence, form (structure) follows function.

Indexed as

Drug DesignAnimalsBiological ProductsBryostatinsDNA CleavageDrug Delivery SystemsHumansLigandsOrganic ChemicalsProtein Kinase CProtein Kinase InhibitorsBiological ProductsBryostatinsLigandsOrganic ChemicalsProtein Kinase CProtein Kinase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID25742599
PMCPMC4415040

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.