ArticleBioinformation2022
Molecular docking analysis of lupeol with different cancer targets.
Article in Bioinformation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Colorectal Cancer: Differential Gene Expression and In Vitro Response to 5-Fluorouracil, Novel Fluoropyrimidine F10, and Potential Synergy with Lupeol.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Exploring Artificial Intelligence's Potential to Enhance Conventional Anticancer Drug Development.Drug development research · 2025Review
- Nano-phytochemical-based formulations as promising opportunities for prostate cancer therapy and management: a comprehensive narrative review.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025Review
- Review
- Metabolomics and Anticancer Potential of the Aerial Parts ofCurrent pharmaceutical design · 2025Article
- Binding affinity screening of polyphenolic compounds in Stachys affinis extract (SAE) for their potential antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- In-depth analysis of lupeol: delving into the diverse pharmacological profile.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
- A review of natural products targeting tumor immune microenvironments for the treatment of lung cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Chromatographic analysis of selected phytosterols fromCurrent research in toxicology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lupeol is one of the secondary metabolite (triterpenoid) present in many medicinally effective plants. It has numerous biological and pharmacological actions. Lupeol is found to have effective herbs and has immense biological activity against several diseases including its cytotoxic effect on cancer cells. In recent drug designing, molecular study of analysis is usually used for understanding the target and the ligand interaction. Therefore, it is of interest to document the molecular docking analysis data of lupeol with different cancer targets such as Caspase- 3, BCL-2, Topoisomerase, PTK, mTOR, H-Ras, PI3K, and AKT. These molecular docking studies were carried out by using AutoDock tools 4.2 version software. Molecular docking analyses of lupeol with target protein were found to have good dock score and minimum inhibition constant. BCL-2, Topoisomerase, PTK, mTOR and PI3Kdocking studies showed the best binding energy inhibition constant and ligand efficiency. The in-silico molecular docking analysis showed that the lupeol having relatively good docking energy, affinity and efficiency towards the active macromolecule, thus it may be considered as good inhibitor of proliferating cancer cells. By this knowledge of docking results, the lupeol can be used as promising drug for anticancer activity.
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.