ReviewBiochemical Society transactions2025
How does protein aggregate structure affect mechanisms of disaggregation?
Review in Biochemical Society transactions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Small bites for big problems: stepwise aggregate degradation by autophagy.Biochemical Society transactions · 2026Review
- Filament formation and NAD processing by noncanonical human FAM118 sirtuins.Nature structural & molecular biology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Protein misfolding and aggregation underpin numerous pathological conditions, including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and Huntington's diseases. Within cells, the competition between protein folding and misfolding-driven aggregation necessitates intricate quality control systems known collectively as the proteostasis network, with molecular chaperones playing central roles. Critical gaps remain in our understanding of why certain protein aggregates are amenable to efficient chaperone-mediated disassembly, while others resist such intervention. Aggregates can be most broadly categorized into structurally ordered amyloid fibrils and more irregular amorphous clusters. Amyloid fibrils are characterized by a highly structured, cross-β-sheet architecture, and they generally display nucleation-driven growth kinetics. In contrast, amorphous aggregates form through heterogeneous interactions among partially unfolded proteins, which typically lack ordered and repeating structure but still display poorly understood, specific assembly constraints. Importantly, amorphous aggregation and amyloid formation are often linked to one another, with several different types of aggregate structures forming at the same time. The ability of molecular chaperones to remodel and disassemble aggregates is affected by aggregate size, internal structure, surface dynamics, and exposure of chaperone-binding sites. However, despite these insights, the mechanistic complexity, aggregate heterogeneity, and dynamic properties present substantial experimental and theoretical challenges. Addressing these challenges will require innovative approaches combining single-molecule biophysics, structural biology, and computational modeling to unveil universal principles governing protein aggregation and disaggregation within cellular environments.
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.