ArticleScientific reports2025
Computational identification and evaluation of novel PD-L1 inhibitors for cancer immunotherapy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Exploring the mechanism of Shengmai San in treating lung adenocarcinoma based on bioinformatics and molecular dynamics simulation.Medicine · 2026Article
- Multi-step computational identification of small molecules targeting the TLT-1 stalk peptide: structural insights into platelet function and thrombosis.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- Integrative computational approaches, molecular docking, and dynamic simulations reveal the antimycobacterial activity of fisetin as a potential inhibitor of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2026Article
- Integrated experimental and computational evaluation of Anagallis foemina derived terpenoids against carbapenem resistant Acinetobacter baumannii.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Molecular docking and dynamics reveal novel CDK6 inhibitors for targeted glioblastoma therapy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antibody-based therapies targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway have shown promise in anticancer immunotherapy; however, challenges such as high cost, immunogenicity, and limited penetration highlight the need for small-molecule inhibitors. To find new inhibitors, this study used the ligand found in PD-L1 (PDB ID: 7DY7) as a reference for virtual screening. The co-crystallized HOU inhibitor and selected ligands binding to the PD-L1 active site were assessed using Maestro 12.5 molecular docking and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. The top ligands were evaluated for pharmacokinetics through ADMET profiling and chemical stability using Density Functional Theory (DFT). With a docking score of - 8.512 kcal/mol, Lig_1 demonstrated the greatest binding, establishing hydrogen bonds with the important residues of PD-L1, generating stable hydrophobic contacts, and π-π stacking with Tyr56. Because Lig_1 has better pharmacokinetic characteristics than CCL, especially its capacity to cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB), it has become a prospective contender. With negligible structural fluctuations, supported by RMSD and Radius of Gyration (Rg) studies, a 100-ns MD simulation further confirmed the steady binding of Lig_1. Lig_1 ensures persistent PD-L1 engagement by maintaining strong hydrophobic contacts and π-π stacking with Tyr56. These results showed the potential of Lig_1 as a new PD-L1 inhibitor by showing that, like CCL, it may cause PD-L1 degradation and interfere with PD-1/PD-L1 signaling. This study offers critical insights into the design of next-generation small-molecule inhibitors, paving the way for more effective cancer immunotherapies.
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.