ArticleBiocatalysis and agricultural biotechnology2021
Identification of M
Article in Biocatalysis and agricultural biotechnology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Synthesis of Metal-Modified Nanocellulose as a Biofilm Analogue for Biofilm Mimicry in Biomedical and Environmental Applications.Biopolymers · 2025Article
- Repercussions of Prolonged Pesticide Use on Natural Soil Microbiome Dynamics Using Metagenomics Approach.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Docking covalent targets for drug discovery: stimulating the computer-aided drug design community of possible pitfalls and erroneous practices.Molecular diversity · 2023Review
- Methodology-Centered Review of Molecular Modeling, Simulation, and Prediction of SARS-CoV-2.Chemical reviews · 2022Review
- In Silico Identification of New Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Main Protease (MJournal of tropical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent outbreak of COVID-19, caused by the novel pathogen SARS-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a severe health emergency. In this pandemic, drug repurposing seems to be the most promising alternative to identify effective therapeutic agents for immediate treatment of infected patients. The present study aimed to evaluate all the drugs present in drug bank as potential novel SARS-CoV-2 inhibitors, using computational drug repurposing studies. Docking-based virtual screening and binding energy prediction were performed, followed by Absorption Distribution Metabolism Excretion calculation. Hydroxychloroquine and Nelfinavir have been identified as the best potential inhibitor against the SARS-CoV-2, therefore, they were used as reference compounds in computational DR studies. The docking study revealed 13 best compounds based on their highest binding affinity, binding energy, and dock score concerning the other screened compounds. Out of 13, only 4 compounds were further shortlisted based on their binding energy and best ADME properties. The hierarchical virtual screening yielded the best 04 drugs, DB07042 (compound 2), DB13035 (compound 3), DB13604 (compound 5) and DB08253 (compound 6), with commendable binding energies in kcal/mol, i.e. -65.45, -62.01, -52.09 and -51.70 respectively. Further, Molecular dynamics simulation with 04 best-retrieved hits has confirmed stable trajectories in protein in terms of root mean square deviation and root mean square fluctuation. During 30 ns simulation, the interactions were also found similar to the docking-based studies. However, clinical studies are necessary to investigate their therapeutic use against this outbreak.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.