ArticleACS omega2024
Structure-Based Computational Scanning of Chemical Modification Sites in Biologics.
Article in ACS omega, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To address the challenges of short half-life, immunogenicity, and nonspecific distribution, chemical modifications of peptide and protein-based drugs have emerged as a versatile strategy for improving their therapeutic efficacy. One such modification involves the derivatization of peptides and proteins with fatty acids, which can protract their half-life, modify their biodistribution, and potentially enable targeted delivery to specific tissues or disease sites of interest. However, the present strategies for the synthesis of such synthetically modified biologics require numerous rounds of experimental testing and often yield unstable, inactive, or heterogeneous products. To address the inefficiencies in designing modified biologics, we developed a hybrid computational workflow that integrates RosettaMatch from the Rosetta suite of protein modeling tools with molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. This approach not only reduces the number of amino acid positions that need to be experimentally tested by targeting only the most promising candidates for modification but also expedites the design of chemically modified biologics with the desired properties, ensuring a rapid and cost-effective development cycle. Although we demonstrate the utility of our method on a peptide therapeutic, GLP-1, with different fatty acid derivatizations, this straightforward approach has the potential to streamline the design process of a diverse range of chemically modified therapeutics, enabling tailored enhancements to their pharmacokinetic properties.
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.