ArticleNucleic acids research2017
Quantitative specificity of STAT1 and several variants.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2017. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- miR-155-5p promotes osteosarcoma progression and cisplatin resistance by targeting the SOCS1/STAT1/c-Fos signaling axis.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Missense mutations in CRX homeodomain cause dominant retinopathies through two distinct mechanisms.eLife · 2023Article
- The intrinsically disordered protein TgIST from Toxoplasma gondii inhibits STAT1 signaling by blocking cofactor recruitment.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Three patients with defects in interferon gamma receptor signaling: A challenging diagnosis.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2022Article
- Review
- Quantitative profiling of BATF family proteins/JUNB/IRF hetero-trimers using Spec-seq.BMC molecular biology · 2018Article
- Measuring quantitative effects of methylation on transcription factor-DNA binding affinity.Science advances · 2017Article
- Inherent limitations of probabilistic models for protein-DNA binding specificity.PLoS computational biology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The quantitative specificity of the STAT1 transcription factor was determined by measuring the relative affinity to hundreds of variants of the consensus binding site including variations in the length of the site. The known consensus sequence is observed to have the highest affinity, with all variants decreasing binding affinity considerably. There is very little loss of binding affinity when the CpG within the consensus binding site is methylated. Additionally, the specificity of mutant proteins, with variants of amino acids that interact with the DNA, was determined and nearly all of them are observed to lose specificity across the entire binding site. The change of Asn at position 460 to His, which corresponds to the natural amino acid at the homologous position in STAT6, does not change the specificity nor does it change the length preference to match that of STAT6. These results provide the first quantitative analysis of changes in binding affinity for the STAT1 protein, and several variants of it, to hundreds of different binding sites including different spacer lengths, and the effect of CpG methylation.
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.