ArticleScientific reports2026
Predicting enzymatic cleavage sites in cyclic peptides with non-canonical amino acids using a Graphormer model trained on MetID user data.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Peptides are promising therapeutic agents because of their high selectivity and efficacy. However, their development is often limited by rapid enzymatic degradation, resulting in short half-lives. Chemical modifications such as cyclization, incorporation of D- or non-natural amino acids, and terminal modifications can improve peptide stability, yet their productive application requires prior identification of potential cleavage sites. Experimental determination of these sites is time-consuming, expensive, and may not fully capture the complexity of physiological environments. While computational approaches for cleavage site prediction exist, most are limited: they apply only to linear peptides composed of standard amino acids, have been tested only in single-enzyme systems, and cannot incorporate user-generated metabolite identification (MetID) data, restricting their utility for customized peptide design. To overcome these limitations, we present a workflow that integrates liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry (LC–MS) data from peptide metabolism studies with a Graphormer-based machine learning model to predict potential cleavage sites in peptides, including those with cycles and/or modified amino acids. The approach was evaluated using publicly available MEROPS datasets and MetID datasets from a leading pharmaceutical company, which included cyclic peptides with both natural and modified amino acids incubated in complex enzymatic matrices. The results show that the model achieves high precision in top-ranked cleavage site predictions, providing scientists with a practical tool that can help guide peptide drug design.
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.