Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36410177›Full record

ReviewInternational journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance2022

Current and emerging target identification methods for novel antimalarials.

Matthew P Challis, Shane M Devine, Darren J Creek

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Onametostat, a PfPRMT5 inhibitor, exhibits antimalarial activity toAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Bibliometric analysis of antimalarial drug resistance.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Fast-Killing Tyrosine Amide ((ACS infectious diseases · 2023
    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

3 authors.

Matthew P ChallisDrug Delivery, Disposition and Dynamics, Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, 381 Royal Parade, Parkville, Victoria, 3052, Australia.
Shane M DevineMedicinal Chemistry, Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, 381 Royal Parade, Parkville, Victoria, 3052, Australia.
Darren J CreekDrug Delivery, Disposition and Dynamics, Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, 381 Royal Parade, Parkville, Victoria, 3052, Australia. Electronic address: Darren.creek@monash.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New antimalarial compounds with novel mechanisms of action are urgently needed to combat the recent rise in antimalarial drug resistance. Phenotypic high-throughput screens have proven to be a successful method for identifying new compounds, however, do not provide mechanistic information about the molecular target(s) responsible for antimalarial action. Current and emerging target identification methods such as in vitro resistance generation, metabolomics screening, chemoproteomic approaches and biophysical assays measuring protein stability across the whole proteome have successfully identified novel drug targets. This review provides an overview of these techniques, comparing their strengths and weaknesses and how they can be utilised for antimalarial target identification.

Indexed as

AntimalarialsDrug ResistanceMetabolomicsPlasmodium falciparumAntimalarialsAntimalarialCETSAChemoproteomicsPlasmodium falciparumTarget identification

Identifiers

PMID36410177
PMCPMC9771836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.