ArticleCurrent drug discovery technologies2024
Article in Current drug discovery technologies, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Identification of Potential Inhibitors from Medicinal Plant-based Phytochemicals for the Influential C4 Target of Diabetic Retinopathy by Molecular Docking Studies.Current pharmaceutical design · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are very few small-molecule drug candidates developed against SARS-CoV-2 that have been revealed since the epidemic began in November 2019. The typical medicinal chemistry discovery approach requires more than a decade of the year of painstaking research and development and a significant financial guarantee, which is not feasible in the challenge of the current epidemic.
objectiveThis current study proposes to find and identify the most effective and promising phytomolecules against SARS-CoV-2 in six essential proteins (3CL protease, Main protease, Papain- Like protease, N-protein RNA binding domain, RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, and Spike receptor binding domain target through
methodsThe phytomolecules and SARS-CoV-2 proteins were taken from public domain databases such as PubChem and RCSB Protein Data Bank. For
resultsThe structure-based molecular docking reveals some molecules' greater affinity towards the target than the co-crystal ligand. Our results show that tannic acid, cyanidin-3-rutinoside, zeaxanthin, and carbolactone are phytomolecules capable of inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 target proteins in the least energy conformations. Tannic acid had the least binding energy of -8.8 kcal/mol, which is better than the binding energy of its corresponding co-crystal ligand (-7.5 kcal/mol) against 3 CL protease. Also, it has shown the least binding energy of -9.9 kcal/mol with a more significant number of conventional hydrogen bond interactions against the RdRp target. Cyanidin-3-rutinoside showed binding energy values of -8.8 and -7.6 kcal/mol against Main protease and Papain-like protease, respectively. Zeaxanthin was the top candidate in the N protein RBD with a binding score of - 8.4 kcal/mol, which is slightly better when compared to a co-crystal ligand (-8.2 kcal/mol). In the spike, carbolactone was the suitable candidate with the binding energy of -7.2 kcal/mol and formed a conventional hydrogen bond and two hydrophobic interactions. The best binding affinity-scored phytomolecules were selected for the MD simulations studies.
conclusionThe present in silico screening study suggested that active phytomolecules from medicinal plants could inhibit SARS-CoV-2 targets. The elite docked compounds with drug-like properties have a harmless ADMET profile, which may help to develop promising COVID-19 inhibitors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.