ReviewBioengineered2015
Genetically modified proteins: functional improvement and chimeragenesis.
Review in Bioengineered, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of Gln269Leu mutation on the thermostability and structure of uricase from Aspergillus flavus.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Stabilization challenges and aggregation in protein-based therapeutics in the pharmaceutical industry.RSC advances · 2023Review
- Insight into the role of the Bateman domain at the molecular and physiological levels through engineered IMP dehydrogenases.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2023Article
- ZINC40099027 promotes monolayer circular defect closure by a novel pathway involving cytosolic activation of focal adhesion kinase and downstream paxillin and ERK1/2.Cell and tissue research · 2022Article
- Genetic Modification Approaches for ParasporinsMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Estimation of polymorphisms in the drug-metabolizing enzyme, cytochromeBioengineered · 2021Article
- Bioengineered non-coding RNA agent (BERA) in action.Bioengineered · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review focuses on the emerging role of site-specific mutagenesis and chimeragenesis for the functional improvement of proteins in areas where traditional protein engineering methods have been extensively used and practically exhausted. The novel path for the creation of the novel proteins has been created on the farther development of the new structure and sequence optimization algorithms for generating and designing the accurate structure models in result of x-ray crystallography studies of a lot of proteins and their mutant forms. Artificial genetic modifications aim to expand nature's repertoire of biomolecules. One of the most exciting potential results of mutagenesis or chimeragenesis finding could be design of effective diagnostics, bio-therapeutics and biocatalysts. A sampling of recent examples is listed below for the in vivo and in vitro genetically improvement of various binding protein and enzyme functions, with references for more in-depth study provided for the reader's benefit.
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.