↓ Skip to main content

Designing macrocyclic disulfide-rich peptides for biotechnological applications

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Chemical Biology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
4 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
171 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Designing macrocyclic disulfide-rich peptides for biotechnological applications
Published in
Nature Chemical Biology, April 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41589-018-0039-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Conan K. Wang, David J. Craik

Abstract

Bioactive peptides have potential as drug leads, but turning them into drugs is a challenge because of their typically poor metabolic stability. Molecular grafting is one approach to stabilizing and constraining peptides and involves melding a bioactive peptide sequence onto a suitable molecular scaffold. This method has the benefit of improving the stability of the bioactive peptide lead and potentially expanding its functionality. Here we step through the molecular grafting process and describe its successes and limitations. So far, molecular grafting has been successfully used to improve the stability of peptide drug leads, to enhance conformational rigidity, to facilitate delivery to intracellular targets, and in some cases to increase efficacy in oral administration. Although applications of molecular grafting have focused mainly on therapeutic applications, including those for pain, metabolic disease, and cancer, its potential uses are much broader, and we hope this Perspective will inspire wider applications of this molecular design tool in biotechnology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 165 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 30%
Researcher 25 15%
Student > Master 21 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 5%
Student > Postgraduate 7 4%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 35 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 50 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 29 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 4%
Other 15 9%
Unknown 39 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2024.
All research outputs
#3,755,293
of 22,957,478 outputs
Outputs from Nature Chemical Biology
#1,690
of 3,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,401
of 296,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Chemical Biology
#33
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,957,478 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,072 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.3. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,630 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.