Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34285415›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Drug discovery2021

The PROTACtable genome.

Melanie Schneider, Chris J Radoux, Andrew Hercules, David Ochoa, Ian Dunham, Lykourgos-Panagiotis Zalmas, Gerhard Hessler, Sven Ruf, Veerabahu Shanmugasundaram, Michael M Hann and 5 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Drug discovery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 118 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
118citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

118 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 244 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Caspase-1 in cancer and inflammatory diseases: a potential therapeutic target.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2026
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

58 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

15 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Melanie SchneiderEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7085-6731
Chris J RadouxEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK.
Andrew HerculesEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK.
David OchoaEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK.
Ian DunhamEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2525-5598
Lykourgos-Panagiotis ZalmasOpen Targets, Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4317-7709
Gerhard HesslerIntegrated Drug Discovery, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Sven RufIntegrated Drug Discovery, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Veerabahu ShanmugasundaramBristol Myers Squibb, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Michael M HannGlaxoSmithKline, GSK Medicines Research Centre, Stevenage, UK.
Pam J ThomasGlaxoSmithKline, GSK Medicines Research Centre, Stevenage, UK.
Markus A QueisserGlaxoSmithKline, GSK Medicines Research Centre, Stevenage, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3368-3827
Andrew B BenowitzGlaxoSmithKline, GSK Medicines Research Centre, Stevenage, UK.
Kris BrownGlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, PA, USA.
Andrew R LeachEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK. arl@ebi.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8178-0253
European Bioinformatics Institute · GBGlaxoSmithKline (United Kingdom) · GBSanofi (Germany) · DEAgenus (United States) · USBristol-Myers Squibb (United States) · USWellcome Sanger Institute · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proteolysis-targeting chimeras (PROTACs) are an emerging drug modality that may offer new opportunities to circumvent some of the limitations associated with traditional small-molecule therapeutics. By analogy with the concept of the 'druggable genome', the question arises as to which potential drug targets might PROTAC-mediated protein degradation be most applicable. Here, we present a systematic approach to the assessment of the PROTAC tractability (PROTACtability) of protein targets using a series of criteria based on data and information from a diverse range of relevant publicly available resources. Our approach could support decision-making on whether or not a particular target may be amenable to modulation using a PROTAC. Using our approach, we identified 1,067 proteins of the human proteome that have not yet been described in the literature as PROTAC targets that offer potential opportunities for future PROTAC-based efforts.

Indexed as

Drug DesignGenomeAnimalsHumansResearch DesignSmall Molecule LibrariesSmall Molecule Libraries

Identifiers

PMID34285415
OpenAlexW3186493235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.