Find a journal
Login In

Clinical & Molecular Biomedicine

Gold Open Access
Guide for Authors
Clinical & Molecular Biomedicine Cover

Clinical & Molecular Biomedicine

Gold Open AccessISSN 2345-2985
Translating Research into Better Healthcare
Samarkand State Medical University

In collaboration with

Samarkand State Medical University

Guide for Authors

About Article

Jump to section

Computational and Biophysical Characterization of Limonene as a Potential Natural Inhibitor of CDK6 for Therapeutic Targeting of Cancer

Volume 1, Issue 1 · January 2026

Volume 1, Issue 1 • January 2026
Download PDF
Open access PDF|CC BY 4.0 Open Access|Correspondence: zulfareengaur@gmail.com

Highlights

  • The study evaluates limonene as a potential natural CDK6 inhibitor using molecular docking, fluorescence spectroscopy, and kinase inhibition assay.
  • Docking against CDK6 (PDB: 3NUP) reported a binding free energy of −6.3 kcal mol−1, predicted pKi of 4.62, and ligand efficiency of 0.63 kcal mol−1 per non-hydrogen atom.
  • Recombinant CDK6 was cloned, expressed in E. coli BL21 (DE3), and purified by Ni–NTA affinity chromatography before biophysical and enzymatic testing.
  • Fluorescence quenching supported strong limonene–CDK6 binding, although the PDF contains an internal Ka discrepancy between 4.1 × 10^7 M−1 and 4.1 × 10^6 M−1.
  • Kinase activity decreased in a dose-dependent manner in the malachite green ATPase assay, supporting functional inhibition of CDK6.

Abstract

Cyclin-dependent kinase 6 (CDK6) plays a central role in G1–S phase cell cycle progression and is frequently dysregulated in various cancers, making it an established therapeutic target. Although selective CDK4/6 inhibitors are clinically available, exploration of natural compounds targeting CDK6 remains limited.

The study investigated the binding mechanism and inhibitory potential of limonene against CDK6 using integrated computational and experimental approaches. Recombinant CDK6 was cloned, expressed, and purified, followed by molecular docking, fluorescence spectroscopy, and kinase inhibition assay.

Docking analysis revealed a binding free energy of −6.3 kcal mol−1, calculated pKi of 4.62, and ligand efficiency of 0.63 kcal mol−1 per non-hydrogen atom. Fluorescence quenching showed strong binding affinity, and enzymatic assays confirmed dose-dependent suppression of CDK6 activity, supporting limonene as a natural scaffold for CDK6-targeted anticancer therapeutics.

Keywords

Cyclin-dependent kinase 6LimoneneMolecular dockingFluorescence spectroscopyKinase inhibition assayProtein-ligand interactionCell cycle regulationAnticancer therapy
Previous article in issueNext article in issue

Article Overview

This article examines limonene as a candidate natural inhibitor of CDK6, a kinase that regulates the G1–S transition, contributes to tumor growth, and also affects immune regulation.

The paper combines in silico docking with recombinant protein expression, purification, fluorescence binding analysis, and a kinase inhibition assay to test whether limonene interacts directly with CDK6 and suppresses its function.

The authors position the work within the broader context of clinically approved CDK4/6 inhibitors such as palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib, while emphasizing the need to explore natural-product scaffolds that may enable new anticancer lead discovery.

Beyond reporting the article content, this JSON preserves important extraction notes where the PDF itself contains internal inconsistencies in numerical reporting.

1. About the Article

This is a research article published in Cellular & Molecular Intelligence in 2026. The article studies limonene as a potential natural inhibitor of CDK6 for therapeutic targeting of cancer.

The corresponding author is Zulfareen, and the article reports an integrated workflow spanning computational docking, recombinant CDK6 production, fluorescence binding analysis, and kinase inhibition testing.

  • Journal: Cellular & Molecular Intelligence
  • Volume/Issue: Vol. 1, No. 1
  • Publication year: 2026
  • Article title: Computational and Biophysical Characterization of Limonene as a Potential Natural Inhibitor of CDK6 for Therapeutic Targeting of Cancer
  • Authors: Zulfareen; Sumra; Shagufta Jahan
  • Affiliation 1: Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Basic Sciences, Jamia Millia Islamia, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi 110025, India
  • Affiliation 2: Department of Biotechnology, Jamia Millia Islamia, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi 110025, India
  • Correspondence email: zulfareengaur@gmail.com
  • DOI shown in PDF: 10.22201/ia.01851101p.20XX.XX.XX.XX
  • Received: April 16th, 2024
  • Accepted: March 21th, 2024
  • Published: March 31, 2026
  • License statement: Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0
  • Open-access status: Open Access

2. Introduction

The introduction frames cancer as a disease of uncontrolled proliferation caused largely by dysregulation of the cell cycle. It explains that cyclins, cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs), and CDK inhibitors coordinate orderly cell-cycle progression, and that disruption of these regulators is a hallmark of tumorigenesis.

CDK6 and CDK4 are described as critical drivers of mammalian cell proliferation through D-type cyclin association, retinoblastoma (RB) phosphorylation, release of E2F transcription factors, and promotion of the G1-to-S transition. The article also notes non-canonical CDK6 functions in differentiation, tissue development, hematopoietic lineage commitment, and anti-tumor immunity.

The introduction summarizes structural and regulatory features of CDK6, including the N-terminal lobe (residues 1–98), the catalytic C-terminal lobe, the activation loop (residues 156–172), and a C-terminal PEST sequence. It also reviews transcriptional, post-transcriptional, and post-translational regulation, including miRNA control and phosphorylation, acetylation, and ubiquitination.

Approved CDK4/6 inhibitors such as palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib are presented as clinically important precedents, especially for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. The article then motivates natural compounds, especially limonene, as promising bioactive scaffolds with anti-proliferative properties that may modulate CDK6 directly or indirectly through cancer-related signaling pathways.

  • CDK6 is linked in the article to breast cancer, leukemia, lymphoma, and glioblastoma.
  • CDK6 is described as a 326-amino-acid protein with approximate mass of 36.5 kDa.
  • Figure 1 illustrates transcriptional, post-transcriptional, and post-translational regulation of Cyclin D–CDK4/6.
  • Figure 2 expands the role of CDK6 into tumor cell proliferation and immune regulation.

3. Materials and Methods

The study combines computational, molecular biology, protein purification, spectroscopy, and enzyme assay methods. Recombinant CDK6 was prepared experimentally so that limonene binding and inhibition could be assessed beyond docking alone.

2.1. Chemicals and Reagents

The expression vector pET-28a(+) and E. coli BL21 (DE3) competent cells were obtained from Qiagen, while E. coli DH5α cells came from Invitrogen. Analytical-grade routine reagents including NaCl and EDTA were purchased from Merck (India), LB broth from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany), kanamycin and IPTG from Sigma-Aldrich, and Ni–NTA purification materials from Bio-Rad and Qiagen.

Limonene used in the study was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (USA).

2.2. Molecular Docking

Docking was performed between limonene (Conformer3D_COMPOUND_CID_22311) and CDK6 crystal structure 3NUP using InstaDock. Binding-affinity calculations were carried out with QuickVina-W, a modified version of AutoDock Vina, and a blind-docking strategy was used to explore potential ligand-binding sites across the protein surface.

The paper explicitly defines the thermodynamic relationships used to derive predicted inhibitory constant (Ki,pred), pKi, and ligand efficiency (LE) from the docking-derived binding free energy.

  • Target structure: CDK6, PDB ID 3NUP
  • Docking platform: InstaDock
  • Scoring engine: QuickVina-W
  • Docking mode: blind docking
  • Temperature used in equations: 298.15 K
  • Gas constant used: 1.98 cal mol−1 K−1
  • Ligand-efficiency formula reported: LE = −ΔG / N

2.3. Plasmid Isolation

Overnight bacterial culture was pelleted, resuspended, lysed, and treated with proteinase K. Plasmid purification was performed using phenol-chloroform extraction, and DNA concentration and purity were checked by Nanodrop at 260 nm.

The isolated plasmid was also confirmed by agarose gel electrophoresis.

2.4. Agarose Gel Electrophoresis

A 0.8% agarose gel was prepared in TAE buffer, ethidium bromide was added after cooling, and samples mixed with bromophenol blue loading dye were loaded into wells. The gel was run at 100–150 V for approximately 45–60 minutes and visualized on a UV transilluminator using a gel documentation system.

  • Gel concentration: 0.8%
  • Running voltage: 100–150 V
  • Run time: about 45–60 minutes

2.5. Competent Cell Preparation and Transformation

A single colony was grown in LB with kanamycin, expanded into fresh medium, and cultured until OD600 reached 0.4–0.6. Cells were chilled on ice, centrifuged, resuspended in ice-cold 10% glycerol, aliquoted, and stored at −80 °C as competent cells.

The pET-28a(+) construct carrying CDK6 was transformed into E. coli BL21 (DE3) by heat shock. Plasmid DNA (50–100 ng) was mixed with chemically competent cells, incubated on ice for 20 minutes, exposed to 42 °C for 90 seconds, then returned to ice for 5 minutes before recovery in LB broth and plating on kanamycin-containing LB agar.

  • OD600 at competence step: 0.4–0.6
  • Competent-cell wash/storage solution: 10% glycerol
  • Storage temperature: −80 °C
  • DNA used for transformation: 50–100 ng
  • Heat-shock temperature/time: 42 °C for 90 s
  • Recovery volume: 900 μL LB broth
  • Recovery condition: 37 °C, 220 rpm, 1 h
  • Plate incubation: 12–16 h at 37 °C

2.6. Expression and Purification

The full-length CDK6 gene (981 nucleotides) was cloned into pET-28a(+) and sequence-verified. Protein expression was carried out in E. coli BL21 (DE3), with induction by 0.25 mM IPTG.

Cells were lysed in buffer containing 25 mM Tris–HCl (pH 8.0), 200 mM NaCl, 1 mM DTT, and 10 mM PMSF, followed by sonication on ice. After centrifugation, the inclusion-body pellet was washed, solubilized in 25 mM Tris–HCl, 200 mM NaCl, and 0.5% sarcosine, and purified on a pre-equilibrated Ni–NTA column. Recombinant CDK6 was eluted with 150 mM imidazole and assessed by 12% SDS–PAGE.

  • Gene length: 981 nucleotides
  • Expression host: E. coli BL21 (DE3)
  • Inducer: 0.25 mM IPTG
  • Lysis buffer: 25 mM Tris–HCl pH 8.0, 200 mM NaCl, 1 mM DTT, 10 mM PMSF
  • Clarification step: 9,000 rpm for 20 min at 4 °C
  • Solubilization buffer: 25 mM Tris–HCl, 200 mM NaCl, 0.5% sarcosine
  • Elution buffer imidazole concentration: 150 mM
  • Purity check: 12% SDS–PAGE

2.7. Kinase Inhibition Assay

Limonene inhibition of recombinant CDK6 was evaluated by a malachite green-based ATPase assay. Reaction mixtures contained purified CDK6 and freshly prepared ATP, and increasing concentrations of limonene were used to test dose dependence.

After incubation, malachite green reagent was added to quantify released phosphate, and absorbance was measured at 600 nm in a 96-well microplate format.

  • Final reaction volume: 50 μL
  • Purified CDK6 concentration: 1 μM
  • ATP concentration: 200 μM
  • Incubation condition: 37 °C for 45 min
  • Stop/development reagent volume: 100 μL malachite green reagent
  • Color-development time: 15–20 min at room temperature
  • Readout wavelength: 600 nm

2.8. Fluorescence Measurement

Intrinsic fluorescence spectroscopy was used to monitor limonene interaction with purified recombinant CDK6. Measurements were made on a JASCO spectrofluorometer (Model FP-6200), and titrations were performed with increasing limonene concentrations.

Fluorescence data were analyzed using Stern–Volmer and modified Stern–Volmer equations to derive the binding constant, number of binding sites, and thermodynamic implications of quenching.

  • Instrument: JASCO spectrofluorometer FP-6200
  • Measurements performed in triplicate
  • Binding analysis framework: Stern–Volmer and modified Stern–Volmer equations

4. Results

The results section reports evidence from docking, protein production, fluorescence quenching, and enzyme inhibition, all pointing toward limonene interaction with CDK6 and functional suppression of kinase activity.

3.1. Molecular Docking

Docking of limonene against CDK6 (3NUP) gave a predicted binding free energy of −6.3 kcal mol−1. The calculated pKi was 4.62 and the ligand efficiency was 0.63 kcal mol−1 per non-hydrogen atom.

The article states that the best-ranked docking pose occupies the active-site cavity and forms stabilizing interactions with key amino acid residues. Figure 3 presents the overall binding mode and a close-up view of the active-site pocket, while Figure 4 expands the analysis into 3D, 2D interaction-map, and surface-complementarity views.

  • ΔG: −6.3 kcal mol−1
  • Predicted pKi: 4.62
  • Ligand efficiency: 0.63 kcal mol−1 per non-hydrogen atom

3.2. Protein Expression and Purification

Plasmid prepared with the QIAprep Spin Miniprep Kit showed purity of about 1.8 by A260/280 measurement. Agarose gel analysis showed nicked, linear, and supercoiled DNA forms, and the verified pET28a+ plasmid was successfully transformed into E. coli BL21 (DE3).

Colonies appeared on kanamycin plates after 12–16 hours at 37 °C. Recombinant CDK6 expression was induced with 0.25 mM IPTG, and purified protein was obtained through Ni–NTA affinity chromatography and confirmed by SDS–PAGE.

  • Plasmid A260/280 purity: about 1.8
  • Selection condition reported: kanamycin 50 μg/ml
  • Colony growth after transformation: 12–16 h at 37 °C
  • Purification confirmation: SDS–PAGE

3.3. Fluorescence Binding Studies

Progressive addition of limonene decreased the intrinsic fluorescence intensity of recombinant CDK6, which the authors interpret as quenching caused by ligand binding and changes in the local environment of aromatic fluorophores, mainly tryptophan residues.

The Stern–Volmer analysis supported concentration-dependent quenching and protein–ligand complex formation. The modified Stern–Volmer analysis was used to extract binding parameters, and the paper reports a strong limonene–CDK6 interaction.

  • Binding constant reported in Results text: 4.1 × 10^6 M−1
  • Binding constant reported in abstract and Figure 6 panel text: 4.1 × 10^7 M−1
  • Interpretation: strong affinity with a defined binding interaction

3.4. Kinase Inhibition Assay

Increasing limonene concentrations caused progressive reduction in CDK6 enzymatic activity, supporting dose-dependent suppression of kinase function.

The article links this functional inhibition to the docking and fluorescence findings, arguing that the limonene–CDK6 interaction is not merely computationally predicted but also biophysically and enzymatically supported. Figure 7 shows the decreasing enzyme activity trend versus ligand concentration.

  • Assay outcome: dose-dependent inhibition of recombinant CDK6 activity
  • Figure support: Figure 7 visualizes declining enzyme activity with increasing limonene concentration

5. Discussion

The discussion reiterates that CDK4/6 are central regulators of cell-cycle progression and validated cancer targets. It emphasizes that inhibition of RB phosphorylation and G1 arrest underlie the therapeutic value of CDK4/6 inhibitors in multiple malignancies.

The paper connects its limonene findings to the broader clinical success of palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib, noting that combination strategies and resistance-focused research have expanded the relevance of CDK4/6-directed therapy.

At the same time, the discussion argues that variable patient responses and the need for predictive biomarkers still leave room for new scaffolds and new therapeutic options. Within that context, limonene is positioned as a natural-product lead that may contribute to future CDK6-targeted development.

  • The article describes CDK4/6 as validated targets across multiple malignancies.
  • It highlights the importance of combination therapy and resistance mechanisms in current CDK4/6 inhibitor research.
  • It calls for broader tumor-type validation and predictive biomarkers.

6. Conclusion

The conclusion states that elevated CDK6 expression correlates with progression and poor prognosis in multiple cancers, reinforcing CDK6 as a therapeutic target.

Within this framework, limonene is presented as a promising inhibitor identified through integrated in silico, biophysical, and enzymatic analyses. The authors argue that limonene may contribute to anticancer effects by modulating cell-cycle regulatory pathways.

The article also stresses that limonene’s relatively simple scaffold may be suitable for rational structural modification to improve potency, selectivity, and drug-like properties. Further cellular and in vivo studies are recommended to validate the translational potential of limonene-derived CDK6 inhibitors.

  • Main conclusion: limonene directly interacts with and functionally inhibits CDK6.
  • Development implication: limonene may serve as a natural scaffold for CDK6-targeted anticancer lead discovery.
  • Recommended next step: cellular and in vivo validation.

7. Statements and Declarations

The article includes dedicated end-matter sections covering funding, acknowledgments, conflict of interest, data availability, and declaration of AI-tool use.

6. Funding

This work received no funding.

7. Acknowledgments

Zulfareen acknowledges Jamia Millia Islamia for providing the Non-NET fellowship.

8. Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

9. Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this manuscript.

10. Declaration on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

The authors declare that ChatGPT (OpenAI) was used only to refine language, improve grammar, and enhance clarity of the manuscript.

The article explicitly states that AI tools were not used to generate scientific content, analyze data, interpret results, or draw scientific conclusions.

Figures

The PDF includes seven figures spanning biological background, docking models, transformation/protein purification evidence, fluorescence binding, and kinase inhibition.

Figure 1

Figure preview is not available for this article.
Figure 1. Schematic illustration of transcriptional, post-transcriptional, and post-translational regulation of Cyclin D–CDK4/6 in normal versus cancer cells, showing controlled versus hyperactivated Rb phosphorylation and E2F release.
Figure 1 · p. 2

Figure 1. Schematic illustration of transcriptional, post-transcriptional, and post-translational regulation of Cyclin D–CDK4/6 in normal versus cancer cells, showing controlled versus hyperactivated Rb phosphorylation and E2F release.

Figure 2. Diagram of CDK6 in tumor proliferation and immune regulation, including approved inhibitors, natural compounds, cell-cycle arrest, PD-L1 regulation, and anti-tumor immunity.
Figure 2 · p. 3

Figure 2. Diagram of CDK6 in tumor proliferation and immune regulation, including approved inhibitors, natural compounds, cell-cycle arrest, PD-L1 regulation, and anti-tumor immunity.

Figure 3. Binding mode of limonene to CDK6, including cartoon view of the complex and zoomed interaction with active-site pocket residues.
Figure 3 · p. 5

Figure 3. Binding mode of limonene to CDK6, including cartoon view of the complex and zoomed interaction with active-site pocket residues.

Figure 4. Molecular docking analysis showing 3D binding pose, 2D interaction map, and surface complementarity for limonene in the CDK6 active site.
Figure 4 · p. 6

Figure 4. Molecular docking analysis showing 3D binding pose, 2D interaction map, and surface complementarity for limonene in the CDK6 active site.

Figure 5. Restriction-digested plasmid bands, transformed E. coli BL21 colonies, and purified CDK6 protein elution lanes.
Figure 5 · p. 6

Figure 5. Restriction-digested plasmid bands, transformed E. coli BL21 colonies, and purified CDK6 protein elution lanes.

Figure 6. Fluorescence emission spectra and modified Stern–Volmer plot showing limonene-induced quenching of CDK6 fluorescence and extraction of binding parameters.
Figure 6 · p. 7

Figure 6. Fluorescence emission spectra and modified Stern–Volmer plot showing limonene-induced quenching of CDK6 fluorescence and extraction of binding parameters.

Figure 7. Graph of enzyme activity versus limonene concentration in the kinase inhibition assay, showing reduced activity with increasing ligand concentration.
Figure 7 · p. 5

Figure 7. Graph of enzyme activity versus limonene concentration in the kinase inhibition assay, showing reduced activity with increasing ligand concentration.

References

  1. 1

    Ausubel, F. M., Brent, R., Kingston, R. E., et al. 1992, Short Protocols in Molecular Biology (New York), 28764–28773

  2. 2

    Bachs, O., Gallastegui, E., Orlando, S., et al. 2018, Oncotarget, 9, 26259

  3. 3

    Classon, M., & Harlow, E. 2002, Nature Reviews Cancer, 2, 910

  4. 4

    de Figueiredo, S. M., Binda, N. S., Nogueira-Machado, J. A., Vieira-Filho, S. A., & Caligiorne, R. B. 2015, Recent Patents on Endocrine, Metabolic & Immune Drug Discovery, 9, 24

  5. 5

    Fontanella, C., Giorgi, C. A., Russo, S., et al. 2022, Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology, 180, 103848, doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103848

    Open articlePDFGoogle ScholarScopus
  6. 6

    Garzon, R., Marcucci, G., & Croce, C. M. 2010, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 9, 775

  7. 7

    Hallett, S. T., Pastok, M. W., Morgan, R. M. L., et al. 2017, Cell Reports, 21, 1386

  8. 8

    Hanahan, D., & Weinberg, R. A. 2011, Cell, 144, 646

  9. 9

    Hassan, N. M., Alhossary, A. A., Mu, Y., & Kwoh, C.-K. 2017, Scientific Reports, 7, 15451

  10. 10

    Hopkins, A. L., Groom, C. R., & Alex, A. 2004, Drug Discovery Today, 9, 430

  11. 11

    Illia, M. F., Colucci, G., Rodriguez Mignola, A., et al. 2026, Translational Breast Cancer Research, 7, 7, doi: 10.21037/tbcr-25-46

    Open articlePDFGoogle ScholarScopus
  12. 12

    Jameel, E., Naz, H., Khan, P., et al. 2017, Chemical Biology & Drug Design, 89, 741

  13. 13

    Kim, J.-A., Kim, D. H., Hossain, M. A., et al. 2013, International Journal of Oncology, 44, 473

  14. 14

    Li, Y., Zhang, J., Gao, W., et al. 2015, International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 16, 9314

  15. 15

    Malumbres, M. 2014, Genome Biology, 15, 122

  16. 16

    Mohammad, T., Mathur, Y., & Hassan, M. I. 2021, Briefings in Bioinformatics, 22, bbaa279

  17. 17

    Nebenfuehr, S., Kollmann, K., & Sexl, V. 2020, International Journal of Cancer, 147, 2988

  18. 18

    O’Sullivan, C. C. 2026, Cancers, 18, doi: 10.3390/cancers18030533

    Open articlePDFGoogle ScholarScopus
  19. 19

    Pavani, R. S., da Silva, M. S., Fernandes, C. A. H., et al. 2016, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 10, e0005181

  20. 20

    Petroni, G., Formenti, S. C., Chen-Kiang, S., & Galluzzi, L. 2020, Nature Reviews Immunology, 20, 669

  21. 21

    Rencuzogullari, O., Yerlikaya, P. O., Gurkan, A. C., Arisan, E. D., & Telci, D. 2020, Journal of Cellular Biochemistry, 121, 508

  22. 22

    Russell, D. W., & Sambrook, J. 2001, Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)

  23. 23

    Russo, A. A., Tong, L., Lee, J.-O., Jeffrey, P. D., & Pavletich, N. P. 1998, Nature, 395, 237

  24. 24

    Sa, G., & Das, T. 2008, Cell Division, 3, 14

  25. 25

    Shah, A., Bloomquist, E., Tang, S., et al. 2018, Clinical Cancer Research, 24, 2999

  26. 26

    Shamsi, A., Anwar, S., Mohammad, T., et al. 2020, Biomolecules, 10, 789

  27. 27

    Sherr, C., Beach, D., & Shapiro, G. 2016, Cancer Discovery, 6, 353

  28. 28

    Shityakov, S., & Foerster, C. 2014, Advances and Applications in Bioinformatics and Chemistry, 1

  29. 29

    Sielecki, T. M., Boylan, J. F., Benfield, P. A., & Trainor, G. L. 2000, Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 43, 1

  30. 30

    Spring, L. M., Wander, S. A., Andre, F., et al. 2020, The Lancet, 395, 817

  31. 31

    Srivastava, N., & Saxena, A. K. 2025, Current Medicinal Chemistry, 32, 7512, doi: 10.2174/0109298673331685241205180307

    Open articlePDFGoogle ScholarScopus
  32. 32

    Sun, J. 2007, Alternative Medicine Review, 12, 259

  33. 33

    Sun, Y., Zhao, Y., Yu, X., Qi, Y., & Dai, X. 2025, Discover Oncology, 17, 138, doi: 10.1007/s12672-025-04269-2

    Open articlePDFGoogle ScholarScopus
  34. 34

    Tigan, A., Bellutti, F., Kollmann, K., Tebb, G., & Sexl, V. 2016, Oncogene, 35, 3083

  35. 35

    Trott, O., & Olson, A. J. 2010, Journal of Computational Chemistry, 31, 455

  36. 36

    Voura, M., Khan, P., Thysiadis, S., et al. 2019, Scientific Reports, 9, 1676

  37. 37

    Yousuf, M., Alam, M., Shamsi, A., et al. 2022, International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 218, 394, doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2022.07.156

    Open articlePDFGoogle ScholarScopus
  38. 38

    Yousuf, M., Shamsi, A., Khan, P., et al. 2020, International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 21, 3526

  39. 39

    Zhu, Z., & Zhu, Q. 2023, Frontiers in Pharmacology, 14, 1212986, doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1212986

    Open articlePDFGoogle ScholarScopus
Clinical & Molecular Biomedicine cover

Explore

  • About journal
  • Aims and scope
  • Journal insights
  • All issues

For Authors

  • Guide for authors
  • Submission guide
  • Open access and publication
Editory Press

Publishing

  • Publish with us
  • Find a journal
  • Word template
  • Submission checklist
  • Reference style guide
  • Peer review policy

Resources

  • All journals
  • AI use guide

Resources

  • Editorial policy
  • Publication ethics
  • Research ethics and consent
  • Open access and publication

© 2026 Clinical & Molecular Biomedicine. All rights reserved.

  • Data availability guide
  • Open access & licensing
  • Publication ethics
  • LaTeX template
  • Company

    • Home
    • About Us
    • Contact
    • FAQ
    • Privacy Policy
    • Sign In
    info@editorypress.uzwww.editorypress.uz

    © 2026 EditoryPress. All rights reserved.