ArticlePloS one2015
Molecular structure-affinity relationship of bufadienolides and human serum albumin in vitro and molecular docking analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimisation of peptides targeting reverse transcriptase HIV-1 using QSAR, machine learning, and computational approaches.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- In Vitro Antioxidant and Anti-Glycation Activity of Resveratrol and Its Novel Triester with Trolox.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Application of Metabolomic Tools for Studying Low Molecular-Weight Fraction of Animal Venoms and Poisons.Toxins · 2018Review
- Bufadienolides ofPhytochemistry reviews : proceedings of the Phytochemical Society of Europe · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development of bufadienolides as anti-tumor agents is limited due to poor pharmacokinetic properties regarding drug half-lives and toxicity in vivo. These serious factors might be improved by increasing the drug/albumin-binding ratio. This study therefore investigated the relationship between the structural properties of nine bufadienolides and their affinities for human serum albumin (HSA) by a fluorescence spectroscopy-based analysis and molecular docking. Fluorescence quenching data showed that the interaction of each bufadienolide with HSA formed a non-fluorescent complex, while thermodynamic parameters revealed negative ΔS and ΔH values, corresponding to changes in enthalpy and entropy, respectively. The structural differences between the various bufadienolides markedly influenced their binding affinity for HSA. With the exception of a C = O bond at the C12 position that decreased the binding affinity for HSA, other polar groups tended to increase the affinity, especially a hydroxyl (OH) group at assorted bufadienolide sites. The rank order of binding affinities for drugs with tri-hydroxyl groups was as follows: 11-OH > 5-OH > 16-OH; in addition, 16-acetoxy (OAc), 10-aldehyde and 14-epoxy constituents notably enhanced the binding affinity. Among these groups, 11-OH and 16-acetyl were especially important for a seamless interaction between the bufadienolides and HSA. Furthermore, molecular docking analysis revealed that either an 11-OH or a 16-OAc group spatially close to a five-membered lactone ring significantly facilitated the anchoring of these compounds within site I of the HSA pocket via hydrogen bonding (H-bonding) with Tyr150 or Lys199, respectively. In summary, bufadienolide structure strongly affects binding with HSA, and 11-OH or 16-OAc groups improve the drug association with key amino acid residues. This information is valuable for the prospective development of bufadienolides with improved pharmacological profiles as novel anti-tumor drugs.
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.