Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34202456›Full record

ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2021

A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Cellular Protein Folding, Misfolding and Aggregation.

Seong Il Choi, Baik L Seong

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Seong Il ChoiDepartment of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Stockholm University, SE 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden.
Baik L SeongDepartment of Biotechnology, College of Life Science and Biotechnology, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7301-082X
Stockholm University · SEYonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How proteins properly fold and maintain solubility at the risk of misfolding and aggregation in the cellular environments still remains largely unknown. Aggregation has been traditionally treated as a consequence of protein folding (or misfolding). Notably, however, aggregation can be generally inhibited by affecting the intermolecular interactions leading to aggregation, independently of protein folding and conformation. We here point out that rigorous distinction between protein folding and aggregation as two independent processes is necessary to reconcile and underlie all observations regarding the combined cellular protein folding and aggregation. So far, the direct attractive interactions (e.g., hydrophobic interactions) between cellular macromolecules including chaperones and interacting polypeptides have been widely believed to mainly stabilize polypeptides against aggregation. However, the intermolecular repulsions by large excluded volume and surface charges of cellular macromolecules can play a key role in stabilizing their physically connected polypeptides against aggregation, irrespective of the connection types and induced conformational changes, underlying the generic intrinsic chaperone activity of cellular macromolecules. Such rigorous distinction and intermolecular repulsive force-driven aggregation inhibition by cellular macromolecules could give new insights into understanding the complex cellular protein landscapes that remain uncharted.

Indexed as

aggregationchaperonesexcluded volumeintermolecular repulsionsmisfoldingprotein foldingsurface charges

Identifiers

PMID34202456
PMCPMC8304792
OpenAlexW3174629575

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.