↓ Skip to main content

Studying epigenetic complexes and their inhibitors with the proteomics toolbox

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epigenetics, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Studying epigenetic complexes and their inhibitors with the proteomics toolbox
Published in
Clinical Epigenetics, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13148-016-0244-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Weigt, Carsten Hopf, Guillaume Médard

Abstract

Some epigenetic modifier proteins have become validated clinical targets. With a few small molecule inhibitors already approved by national health administrations and many more in the pharmaceutical industry pipelines, there is a need for technologies that can promote full comprehension of the molecular action of these drugs. Proteomics, with its relatively unbiased nature, can contribute to a thorough understanding of the complexity of the megadalton complexes, which write, read and erase the histone code, and it can help study the on-target and off-target effect of the drugs designed to modulate their action. This review on the one hand gathers the published affinity probes able to decipher small molecule targets and off-targets in a close-to-native environment. These are small molecule analogues of epigenetic drugs conceived as protein target enrichment tools after they have engaged them in cells or lysates. Such probes, which have been designed for deacetylases, bromodomains, demethylases, and methyltransferases not only enrich their direct protein targets but also their stable interactors, which can be identified by mass spectrometry. Hence, they constitute a tool to study the epigenetic complexes together with other techniques also reviewed here: immunoaffinity purification with antibodies against native protein complex constituents or epitope tags, affinity matrices designed to bind recombinantly tagged protein, and enrichment of the complexes using histone tail peptides as baits. We expect that this toolbox will be adopted by more and more researchers willing to harness the spectacular advances in mass spectrometry to the epigenetic field.

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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 24%
Student > Bachelor 9 17%
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 43%
Chemistry 10 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 6 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 July 2016.
All research outputs
#14,268,471
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epigenetics
#744
of 1,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,929
of 363,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epigenetics
#19
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,259 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 363,150 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.