| Title |
MDM2–MDM4 molecular interaction investigated by atomic force spectroscopy and surface plasmon resonance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s114705 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ilaria Moscetti, Emanuela Teveroni, Fabiola Moretti, Anna Rita Bizzarri, Salvatore Cannistraro |
| Abstract |
Murine double minute 2 (MDM2) and 4 (MDM4) are known as the main negative regulators of p53, a tumor suppressor. They are able to form heterodimers that are much more effective in the downregulation of p53. Therefore, the MDM2-MDM4 complex could be a target for promising therapeutic restoration of p53 function. To this aim, a deeper understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlining the heterodimerization is needed. The kinetic and thermodynamic characterization of the MDM2-MDM4 complex was performed with two complementary approaches: atomic force spectroscopy and surface plasmon resonance. Both techniques revealed an equilibrium dissociation constant (KD ) in the micromolar range for the MDM2-MDM4 heterodimer, similar to related complexes involved in the p53 network. Furthermore, the MDM2-MDM4 complex is characterized by a relatively high free energy, through a single energy barrier, and by a lifetime in the order of tens of seconds. New insights into the MDM2-MDM4 interaction could be highly important for developing innovative anticancer drugs focused on p53 reactivation. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 23% |
| Researcher | 3 | 23% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 8% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
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 31 August 2016.
All research outputs
#15,739,529
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,774
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,654
of 381,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#51
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
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 381,036 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 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.