Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35128405›Full record

ReviewRSC chemical biology2022

Cyclic peptide drugs approved in the last two decades (2001-2021).

Huiya Zhang, Shiyu Chen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in RSC chemical biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 130 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
130citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

130 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. HFGuidedDesign:Chemical science · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Photoredox-Catalyzed Lysine C(spJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

70 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

2 authors.

Huiya ZhangBiotech Drug Research Center, Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences Shanghai 201203 China chenshiyu@simm.ac.cn.
Shiyu ChenBiotech Drug Research Center, Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Sciences Shanghai 201203 China chenshiyu@simm.ac.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6578-561X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In contrast to the major families of small molecules and antibodies, cyclic peptides, as a family of synthesizable macromolecules, have distinct biochemical and therapeutic properties for pharmaceutical applications. Cyclic peptide-based drugs have increasingly been developed in the past two decades, confirming the common perception that cyclic peptides have high binding affinities and low metabolic toxicity as antibodies, good stability and ease of manufacture as small molecules. Natural peptides were the major source of cyclic peptide drugs in the last century, and cyclic peptides derived from novel screening and cyclization strategies are the new source. In this review, we will discuss and summarize 18 cyclic peptides approved for clinical use in the past two decades to provide a better understanding of cyclic peptide development and to inspire new perspectives. The purpose of the present review is to promote efforts to resolve the challenges in the development of cyclic peptide drugs that are more effective.

Identifiers

PMID35128405
PMCPMC8729179

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.