ArticlePharmaceutical biology2017
Rational screening of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ agonists from natural products: potential therapeutics for heart failure.
Article in Pharmaceutical biology, 2017. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Addressing chemically-induced obesogenic metabolic disruption: selection of chemicals forFrontiers in endocrinology · 2024Review
- Activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ reduces alcohol drinking and seeking by modulating multiple mesocorticolimbic regions in rats.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2021Article
- Therapeutic potential of PPARγ natural agonists in liver diseases.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2020Review
- The Power of Resolution: Contextualized Understanding of Biological Responses to Liver Injury Chemicals Using High-throughput Transcriptomics and Benchmark Concentration Modeling.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextPeroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPARγ) is a member of the nuclear hormone receptor superfamily of ligand-activated transcription factors. Activation of PPARγ pathway has been shown to enhance fatty acid oxidation, improve endothelial cell function, and decrease myocardial fibrosis in heart failure. Thus, the protein has been raised as an attractive target for heart failure therapy.
objectiveThis work attempted to discover new and potent PPARγ agonists from natural products using a synthetic strategy of computer virtual screening and transactivation reporter assay. MATERIALS AND
methodsA large library of structurally diverse, drug-like natural products was compiled, from which those with unsatisfactory pharmacokinetic profile and/or structurally redundant compounds were excluded. The binding mode of remaining candidates to PPARγ ligand-binding domain (LBD) was computationally modelled using molecular docking and their relative binding potency was ranked by an empirical scoring scheme. Consequently, eight commercially available hits with top scores were selected and their biological activity was determined using a cell-based reporter-gene assay.
resultsFour natural product compounds, namely ZINC13408172, ZINC4292805, ZINC44179 and ZINC901461, were identified to have high or moderate agonistic potency against human PPARγ with EC DISCUSSION AND
conclusionThe integrated in vitro-in silico screening strategy can be successfully applied to rational discovery of biologically active compounds. The newly identified natural products with PPARγ agonistic potency are considered as promising lead scaffolds to develop novel chemical therapeutics for heart failure.
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.