2020
DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbaa153
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

AntiCP 2.0: an updated model for predicting anticancer peptides

Abstract: Increasing use of therapeutic peptides for treating cancer has received considerable attention of the scientific community in the recent years. The present study describes the in silico model developed for predicting and designing anticancer peptides (ACPs). ACPs residue composition analysis show the preference of A, F, K, L and W. Positional preference analysis revealed that residues A, F and K are favored at N-terminus and residues L and K are preferred at C-terminus. Motif analysis revealed the presence of … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
84
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 148 publications
(87 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
3
84
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To verify the effectiveness of our proposed method, we compared our method ACP-DA with ACP-DL ( Yi et al, 2019 ), AntiCP 2.0 ( Agrawal et al, 2020 ), and DeepACP ( Yu et al, 2020 ). The results on ACP740 and ACP240 are shown in Figure 5 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To verify the effectiveness of our proposed method, we compared our method ACP-DA with ACP-DL ( Yi et al, 2019 ), AntiCP 2.0 ( Agrawal et al, 2020 ), and DeepACP ( Yu et al, 2020 ). The results on ACP740 and ACP240 are shown in Figure 5 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Yi et al, 2019 proposed a deep learning long short-term memory (LSTM) neural network model called ACP-DL to predict novel ACPs. Agrawal et al, 2020 used various features and different machine learning classifiers on two datasets for the prediction of ACPs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To prioritize the peptides for experimental screening and validation, we hypothesized that the consensus results from the physicochemical property (positive charge), secondary peptide structure (alpha helix) and ACP-predicted results from different machine learning models would provide the best chance for the identification of ACP from the peptide library. This hypothesis was grounded on previous evidence as following: (i) the net positively charged peptides are attracted to the net negatively charged cancer cell membranes [45]; (ii) most known oncolytic peptides share an alpha helical structure [42]; (iii) different machine learning models were trained and tested upon various datasets of known ACPs [33][34][35][36], so these models have varied predictive performance against the new unknown peptide dataset. More positive predictions would provide more confidence in the predicted candidates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…study, including ACPpred-FL [33], antiCP 2.0 [34], MLACP [35], and mACPpred [36] (Fig-ure 3c and Table S2). From the data shown in Table S2, eight human milk peptides were selected as having ACP potential, based on net charge, secondary structure, and predicted anticancer property, and used for further analysis.…”
Section: Peptide Identification Library Construction and In Silico Anticancer Peptide Screeningmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation