Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33803033›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Predicting Proteolysis in Complex Proteomes Using Deep Learning.

Matiss Ozols, Alexander Eckersley, Christopher I Platt, Callum Stewart-McGuinness, Sarah A Hibbert, Jerico Revote, Fuyi Li, Christopher E M Griffiths, Rachel E B Watson, Jiangning Song and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Technical review of artificial intelligence in TCR-T therapy.Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Peptide location fingerprinting identifies structural alterations within basement membrane components in ageing kidney.Matrix biology : journal of the International Society for Matrix Biology · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Matiss OzolsDivision of Cell Matrix Biology & Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5663-1053
Alexander EckersleyDivision of Cell Matrix Biology & Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Christopher I PlattDivision of Cell Matrix Biology & Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Callum Stewart-McGuinnessDivision of Cell Matrix Biology & Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Sarah A HibbertDivision of Cell Matrix Biology & Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Jerico RevoteMonash Bioinformatics Platform, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia.
Fuyi LiDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, The Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5216-3213
Christopher E M GriffithsCentre for Dermatology Research, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, and Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Rachel E B WatsonCentre for Dermatology Research, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, and Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.
Jiangning SongInfection and Immunity Program, Biomedicine Discovery Institute and Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8031-9086
Mike BellResearch and Development, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Thane Road, Nottingham NG90 1BS, UK.
Michael J SherrattDivision of Cell Matrix Biology & Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4759-6617
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBMonash University · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUWalgreens Boots Alliance (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

Walgreens Not applicable
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Both protease- and reactive oxygen species (ROS)-mediated proteolysis are thought to be key effectors of tissue remodeling. We have previously shown that comparison of amino acid composition can predict the differential susceptibilities of proteins to photo-oxidation. However, predicting protein susceptibility to endogenous proteases remains challenging. Here, we aim to develop bioinformatics tools to (i) predict cleavage site locations (and hence putative protein susceptibilities) and (ii) compare the predicted vulnerabilities of skin proteins to protease- and ROS-mediated proteolysis. The first goal of this study was to experimentally evaluate the ability of existing protease cleavage site prediction models (PROSPER and DeepCleave) to identify experimentally determined MMP9 cleavage sites in two purified proteins and in a complex human dermal fibroblast-derived extracellular matrix (ECM) proteome. We subsequently developed deep bidirectional recurrent neural network (BRNN) models to predict cleavage sites for 14 tissue proteases. The predictions of the new models were tested against experimental datasets and combined with amino acid composition analysis (to predict ultraviolet radiation (UVR)/ROS susceptibility) in a new web app: the Manchester proteome susceptibility calculator (MPSC). The BRNN models performed better in predicting cleavage sites in native dermal ECM proteins than existing models (DeepCleave and PROSPER), and application of MPSC to the skin proteome suggests that: compared with the elastic fiber network, fibrillar collagens may be susceptible primarily to protease-mediated proteolysis. We also identify additional putative targets of oxidative damage (dermatopontin, fibulins and defensins) and protease action (laminins and nidogen). MPSC has the potential to identify potential targets of proteolysis in disparate tissues and disease states.

Indexed as

Deep LearningProteolysisAmino AcidsExtracellular Matrix ProteinsHumansNeural Networks, ComputerPeptide HydrolasesProteomeReactive Oxygen SpeciesReproducibility of ResultsSoftwareUltraviolet RaysAmino AcidsExtracellular Matrix ProteinsPeptide HydrolasesProteomeReactive Oxygen Speciesagingbiomarkersdeep-learningdegradomicsextracellular matrixmachine learningproteaseskin

Identifiers

PMID33803033
PMCPMC8002881
OpenAlexW3137132286

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.