ReviewFrontiers in chemistry2022
Deciphering the Structure and Formation of Amyloids in Neurodegenerative Diseases With Chemical Biology Tools.
Review in Frontiers in chemistry, 2022. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physiological responses to mask-associated COFrontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Effect of PHF-1 hyperphosphorylation on the seeding activity of C-terminal Tau fragments.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The O-GlcNAc Modification of Recombinant Tau Protein and Characterization of the O-GlcNAc Pattern for Functional Study.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Phosphorylation of Tau Protein by CDK2/cyclin A and GSK3β Recombinant Kinases: Analysis of Phosphorylation Patterns by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Chemical Synthesis of Microtubule-Associated Protein Tau.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Protein aggregation into highly ordered, regularly repeated cross-β sheet structures called amyloid fibrils is closely associated to human disorders such as neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases, or systemic diseases like type II diabetes. Yet, in some cases, such as the HET-s prion, amyloids have biological functions. High-resolution structures of amyloids fibrils from cryo-electron microscopy have very recently highlighted their ultrastructural organization and polymorphisms. However, the molecular mechanisms and the role of co-factors (posttranslational modifications, non-proteinaceous components and other proteins) acting on the fibril formation are still poorly understood. Whether amyloid fibrils play a toxic or protective role in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases remains to be elucidated. Furthermore, such aberrant protein-protein interactions challenge the search of small-molecule drugs or immunotherapy approaches targeting amyloid formation. In this review, we describe how chemical biology tools contribute to new insights on the mode of action of amyloidogenic proteins and peptides, defining their structural signature and aggregation pathways by capturing their molecular details and conformational heterogeneity. Challenging the imagination of scientists, this constantly expanding field provides crucial tools to unravel mechanistic detail of amyloid formation such as semisynthetic proteins and small-molecule sensors of conformational changes and/or aggregation. Protein engineering methods and bioorthogonal chemistry for the introduction of protein chemical modifications are additional fruitful strategies to tackle the challenge of understanding amyloid formation.
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.