Paper detail

On the abundance of intrinsically disordered proteins in the human proteome and its relation to diseases: there is no enrichment

Intrinsically disordered proteins are fascinating the community of protein science since the last decade, at least. There is a well-established line of research that intends to reveal the crucial role played by intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) in the development of human diseases. The main argument is that IDPs are differentially more present in groups of disease-related proteins. In this note we compare the frequency of disorder in human proteins, both disease-related and not. The frequency of disorder is comparable in the two sub-groups of proteins. Disorder is widespread in human proteins, but it is not a specific pre-requisite of proteins involved in the development of cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and neurodegenerative diseases. A tendency of cancer-related proteins to be statistically more disordered than the rest of human proteins is confirmed.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.