ArticlePloS one2016
Computational Framework for Prediction of Peptide Sequences That May Mediate Multiple Protein Interactions in Cancer-Associated Hub Proteins.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- FKBP3 aggravates the malignant phenotype of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma by PARK7-mediated activation of Wnt/β-catenin signalling.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2024Article
- The predictive performance of short-linear motif features in the prediction of calmodulin-binding proteins.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
- MYCbase: a database of functional sites and biochemical properties of Myc in both normal and cancer cells.BMC bioinformatics · 2017Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A considerable proportion of protein-protein interactions (PPIs) in the cell are estimated to be mediated by very short peptide segments that approximately conform to specific sequence patterns known as linear motifs (LMs), often present in the disordered regions in the eukaryotic proteins. These peptides have been found to interact with low affinity and are able bind to multiple interactors, thus playing an important role in the PPI networks involving date hubs. In this work, PPI data and de novo motif identification based method (MEME) were used to identify such peptides in three cancer-associated hub proteins-MYC, APC and MDM2. The peptides corresponding to the significant LMs identified for each hub protein were aligned, the overlapping regions across these peptides being termed as overlapping linear peptides (OLPs). These OLPs were thus predicted to be responsible for multiple PPIs of the corresponding hub proteins and a scoring system was developed to rank them. We predicted six OLPs in MYC and five OLPs in MDM2 that scored higher than OLP predictions from randomly generated protein sets. Two OLP sequences from the C-terminal of MYC were predicted to bind with FBXW7, component of an E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase complex involved in proteasomal degradation of MYC. Similarly, we identified peptides in the C-terminal of MDM2 interacting with FKBP3, which has a specific role in auto-ubiquitinylation of MDM2. The peptide sequences predicted in MYC and MDM2 look promising for designing orthosteric inhibitors against possible disease-associated PPIs. Since these OLPs can interact with other proteins as well, these inhibitors should be specific to the targeted interactor to prevent undesired side-effects. This computational framework has been designed to predict and rank the peptide regions that may mediate multiple PPIs and can be applied to other disease-associated date hub proteins for prediction of novel therapeutic targets of small molecule PPI modulators.
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.