Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30471192›Full record

ReviewChemical biology & drug design2019

Computational methods and tools to predict cytochrome P450 metabolism for drug discovery.

Jonathan D Tyzack, Johannes Kirchmair

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Chemical biology & drug design, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Testing Strategies for Metabolite-Mediated Neurotoxicity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Automated Annotation of Sites of Metabolism from Biotransformation Data.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jonathan D TyzackEMBL-EBI, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4827-9023
Johannes KirchmairDepartment of Chemistry, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-2667-5877

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this review, we present important, recent developments in the computational prediction of cytochrome P450 (CYP) metabolism in the context of drug discovery. We discuss in silico models for the various aspects of CYP metabolism prediction, including CYP substrate and inhibitor predictors, site of metabolism predictors (i.e., metabolically labile sites within potential substrates) and metabolite structure predictors. We summarize the different approaches taken by these models, such as rule-based methods, machine learning, data mining, quantum chemical methods, molecular interaction fields, and docking. We highlight the scope and limitations of each method and discuss future implications for the field of metabolism prediction in drug discovery.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyDrug DiscoveryMachine LearningCytochrome P-450 Enzyme SystemPharmaceutical PreparationsQuantitative Structure-Activity RelationshipQuantum TheorySubstrate SpecificityCytochrome P-450 Enzyme SystemPharmaceutical Preparationscytochrome P450drug discoveryenzyme-ligand interactionmachine learningmetabolismmetabolite structurespredictionreactivitysites of metabolism

Identifiers

PMID30471192
PMCPMC6590657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.