Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34123270›Full record

ArticleChemical science2020

A robust photoluminescence screening assay identifies uracil-DNA glycosylase inhibitors against prostate cancer.

Guodong Li, Stuart Adam Henry, Hao Liu, Tian-Shu Kang, Sang-Cuo Nao, Yichao Zhao, Chun Wu, Jianwen Jin, Jia-Tong Zhang, Chung-Hang Leung and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chemical science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Pesticide biosensors: trends and progresses.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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 7 countries.

Guodong LiState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau Macau duncanleung@um.edu.mo.
Stuart Adam HenryDepartment of Chemistry, University of Warwick Coventry CV4 7AL UK.
Hao LiuDepartment of Chemistry, Hong Kong Baptist University Kowloon Tong Hong Kong edmondma@hkbu.edu.hk.
Tian-Shu KangState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau Macau duncanleung@um.edu.mo.
Sang-Cuo NaoState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau Macau duncanleung@um.edu.mo.
Yichao ZhaoSchool of Chemistry, Monash University Clayton Victoria 3800 Australia phil.chan@monash.edu.
Chun WuDepartment of Chemistry, Hong Kong Baptist University Kowloon Tong Hong Kong edmondma@hkbu.edu.hk.
Jianwen JinSchool of Chemistry, Monash University Clayton Victoria 3800 Australia phil.chan@monash.edu.
Jia-Tong ZhangState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau Macau duncanleung@um.edu.mo.
Chung-Hang LeungState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau Macau duncanleung@um.edu.mo.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2988-3786
Philip Wai Hong ChanDepartment of Chemistry, University of Warwick Coventry CV4 7AL UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8786-6143
Dik-Lung MaDepartment of Chemistry, Hong Kong Baptist University Kowloon Tong Hong Kong edmondma@hkbu.edu.hk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9515-340X
University of Macau · MOHong Kong Baptist University · HKAustralian Regenerative Medicine Institute · AUUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many cancers have developed resistance to 5-FU, due to removal by the enzyme uracil-DNA glycosylase (UDG), a type of base excision repair enzyme (BER) that can excise uracil and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) from DNA. However, the development of UDG inhibitor screening methods, especially for the rapid and efficient screening of natural product/natural product-like compounds, is still limited so far. We developed herein a robust time-resolved photoluminescence method for screening UDG inhibitors, which could significantly improve sensitivity over the screening method based on the conventional steady-state spectroscopy, reducing the substantial fluorescence background interference. As a proof-of-concept, two potential UDG inhibitors were identified from a database of natural products and approved drugs. Co-treatment of these two compounds with 5-FU showed synergistic cytotoxicity, providing the basis for treating drug-resistant cancers. Overall, this method provides an avenue for the rapid screening of small molecule regulators of other BER enzyme activities that can avoid false negatives arising from the background fluorescence.

Identifiers

PMID34123270
PMCPMC8148385
OpenAlexW2998964886

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.