ArticleScientific reports2026
A comparative in silico and in vitro analysis of antiviral agents targeting estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nearly 70% of all cases of breast cancer are hormone receptor-positive (HR⁺) breast cancer, which continues to pose a significant clinical challenge because of the development of resistance to traditional endocrine therapies. The current study investigates the possibility of repurposing clinically approved antiviral drugs as alternative modulators of the progesterone receptor (PR) and estrogen receptor α (ERα) in order to address this. Hierarchical molecular docking, followed by network pharmacology, MM/GBSA free-energy estimation, normal-mode analysis (NMA), and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, were used to screen 90 antiviral medications that represented 13 pharmacological classes. Valganciclovir had the best binding affinity for ERα (–9.118 kcal mol⁻¹) among the compounds that were screened. It formed hydrophobic contacts with Leu387, Leu525, and Met421, as well as stable hydrogen-bond interactions with the canonical triad residues Glu353, Arg394, and His524. With protein RMSD kept within 1.8–2.2 Å and ligand RMSD kept between 2.0 and 3.5 Å, MD simulations verified complex stability over 100 ns. Valganciclovir–PR interactions, on the other hand, showed greater dynamic fluctuations (ligand RMSD ≈ 3.0–5.5 Å) and were weaker (–7.673 kcal mol⁻¹). The Valganciclovir–ERα complex’s binding free energy, as determined by MM/GBSA analysis, was − 44.50 kcal mol⁻¹, supporting strong electrostatic and van der Waals stabilization. In accordance with tighter engagement, NMA showed more conformational restriction upon ERα binding (ΔS = − 9.1 kcal mol⁻¹ K⁻¹) than PR (ΔS = − 7.4 kcal mol⁻¹ K⁻¹). Ten hub genes (GAPDH, AKT1, TNF, EGFR, HIF1A, BCL2, MTOR, GSK3B, MAPK1, and PIK3CA) involved in PI3K/AKT, MAPK, ErbB, and HIF-1 signaling were highlighted among the 142 shared targets between Valganciclovir and genes linked to breast cancer that were found by network pharmacology. In vitro validation in MCF-7 breast cancer cells demonstrated dose-dependent cytotoxicity with an IC₅₀ of 19.43 µg/mL. Quantitative real-time PCR analysis revealed downregulation of ERα (0.76-fold) and upregulation of PR-B (1.36-fold) following treatment, supporting the predicted receptor-targeting mechanism. Collectively, these findings suggest that Valganciclovir may act as a dual-modality modulator—directly stabilizing ERα in an inactive conformation and indirectly attenuating downstream oncogenic signaling—thereby offering a promising scaffold for the development of next-generation endocrine therapeutics in HR⁺ breast cancer.
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.