Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35128404›Full record

ReviewRSC chemical biology2022

Macrocyclic DNA-encoded chemical libraries: a historical perspective.

Louise Plais, Jörg Scheuermann

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in RSC chemical biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Phage Display as a Promising Platform for Peptide Drug Discovery.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. On-Resin Assembly of Macrocyclic Inhibitors ofJournal of medicinal chemistry · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. A Tag-Free Platform for Synthesis and Screening of Cyclic Peptide Libraries.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Small-molecule discovery through DNA-encoded libraries.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2023
    Review
  17. Evaluation of the Topology Space of DNA-Encoded Libraries.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Cell-free Biosynthesis of Peptidomimetics.Biotechnology and bioprocess engineering : BBE · 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

2 authors.

Louise PlaisDepartment of Chemistry and Applied Biosciences, ETH Zürich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology) Vladimir-Prelog-Weg 4 CH-8093 Zürich Switzerland joerg.scheuermann@pharma.ethz.ch.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0987-0585
Jörg ScheuermannDepartment of Chemistry and Applied Biosciences, ETH Zürich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology) Vladimir-Prelog-Weg 4 CH-8093 Zürich Switzerland joerg.scheuermann@pharma.ethz.ch.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7746-4717

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While macrocyclic peptides are extensively researched for therapeutically relevant protein targets, DNA-encoded chemical libraries (DELs) are developed at a quick pace to discover novel small molecule binders. The combination of both fields has been explored since 2004 and the number of macrocyclic peptide DELs is steadily increasing. Macrocycles with high affinity and potency were identified for diverse classes of proteins, revealing DEL's huge potential. By giving a historical perspective, we would like to review the methods which permitted the rise of macrocyclic peptide DELs, describe the different DELs which were created and discuss the achievements and challenges of this emerging field.

Identifiers

PMID35128404
PMCPMC8729180

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.