Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36699419›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics advances2022

ProteinPrompt: a webserver for predicting protein-protein interactions.

Sebastian Canzler, Markus Fischer, David Ulbricht, Nikola Ristic, Peter W Hildebrand, René Staritzbichler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Chromosome-ContiguousInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Unlocking TRPM7 interactions: A database-driven quest.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Methods for studying mammalian aquaporin biology.Biology methods & protocols · 2023
    Review
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

6 authors.

Sebastian CanzlerImmuthera GmbH, 04275 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7935-9582
Markus FischerInstitute of Medical Physics and Biophysics, University of Leipzig, 04107 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7057-2309
David UlbrichtInstitute of Medical Physics and Biophysics, University of Leipzig, 04107 Leipzig, Germany.
Nikola RisticInstitute of Medical Physics and Biophysics, University of Leipzig, 04107 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0521-322X
Peter W HildebrandInstitute of Medical Physics and Biophysics, University of Leipzig, 04107 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0063-1104
René StaritzbichlerImmuthera GmbH, 04275 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6719-2997

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motivation: Protein-protein interactions (PPIs) play an essential role in a great variety of cellular processes and are therefore of significant interest for the design of new therapeutic compounds as well as the identification of side effects due to unexpected binding. Here, we present ProteinPrompt, a webserver that uses machine learning algorithms to calculate specific, currently unknown PPIs. Our tool is designed to quickly and reliably predict contact propensities based on an input sequence in order to scan large sequence libraries for potential binding partners, with the goal to accelerate and assure the quality of the laborious process of drug target identification. Results: We collected and thoroughly filtered a comprehensive database of known binders from several sources, which is available as download. ProteinPrompt provides two complementary search methods of similar accuracy for comparison and consensus building. The default method is a random forest (RF) algorithm that uses the auto-correlations of seven amino acid scales. Alternatively, a graph neural network (GNN) implementation can be selected. Additionally, a consensus prediction is available. For each query sequence, potential binding partners are identified from a protein sequence database. The proteom of several organisms are available and can be searched for binders. To evaluate the predictive power of the algorithms, we prepared a test dataset that was rigorously filtered for redundancy. No sequence pairs similar to the ones used for training were included in this dataset. With this challenging dataset, the RF method achieved an accuracy rate of 0.88 and an area under the curve of 0.95. The GNN achieved an accuracy rate of 0.86 using the same dataset. Since the underlying learning approaches are unrelated, comparing the results of RF and GNNs reduces the likelihood of errors. The consensus reached an accuracy of 0.89. Availability and implementation: ProteinPrompt is available online at: http://proteinformatics.org/ProteinPrompt, where training and test data used to optimize the methods are also available. The server makes it possible to scan the human proteome for potential binding partners of an input sequence within minutes. For local offline usage, we furthermore created a ProteinPrompt Docker image which allows for batch submission: https://gitlab.hzdr.de/proteinprompt/ProteinPrompt. In conclusion, we offer a fast, accurate, easy-to-use online service for predicting binding partners from an input sequence.

Identifiers

PMID36699419
PMCPMC9710678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.