Talk:P-glycoprotein

message: Was the protein cloned in 1976, as written? Seems unlikely. (I don't have access to the article, so I can't check.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.99.186 (talk) 02:47, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on P-glycoprotein. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060212150416/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/books/bv.fcgi?rid=mono_001.chapter.137 to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=mono_001.chapter.137
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:05, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: However, there was no reference spamming. The two edits added a total of 2 new citations to the article. Having multiple citations for claims is common practice. I have no idea why Jytdog invokes REFSPAM. The edits were not made by me. --Deleet (talk) 01:33, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: had already explained to you here on your talk page, when you posted this. Jytdog (talk) 03:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jytdog undos revision claiming REFSPAM 

message: Content
Materials are organized based on the headings, in each heading the content focuses on the topic tightly, but just slightly lacks reasonable orders. Basically, the presentation is understandable, but if some examples could be provided to back up some terms and professional claims, the article could be better presented. The article covers the topic in a lot of aspects, from my view, after reading through all the article I gained a nearly complete understanding of P-gp, compared with what I already learnt about the P-gp. Though I need to pay attention to each detail, I can find almost all what I know in the article, except for professionalized knowledge such as involved signaling pathways. 
Quality
The article has an introduction and the introduction of the article is well organized. The introduction contains several, but not too many terms, while the terms included are not too specific, which makes the introduction not too hard to understand. The flow of the introduction follows the list of headings well, by briefly covering nearly all the aspects in the content (except for ‘History’ and ‘Research’). The introduction summarizes the major information of all aspects, which makes it a quick and informative introduction. There are about 10 headings and subheadings, the contents of headings and subheadings are much more detailed and specific than the corresponding contents in the introduction. For example, for ‘protein’, in the introduction, the article only mentions P-gp as a member of ABC transporter superfamily, but in the content, transmembrane domains (TMDs) that binds substrates, and highly conserved ATP-binding sites (NBDs) are introduced. In the content, the detailed structure of P-gp is introduced using primary classical articles as evidences, which are well cited.
Three images and three tables are on the right side of the article, and appendices and footnotes are at the end, which note the reference of the pictures and tables. Links are also presented. Once click on the links, the readers will be guided to separated page showing the original resource of the pictures/tables. Some of the pages include the tools used to generate the pictures/tables.
Both the general functions and the implication of P-gp in diseases are introduced in a balance. From my own point, the role of P-gp in cancer drug resistance is introduced dispersedly but not stressed in this article, which should be considered as a sign of neutral coverage. However, because even in the ‘Clinical significance, Diseases’ part I did not see the implication of P-gp in cancers, therefore I feel more stress on cancer should be added into the article.
Evaluation on evidences
In the article, facts are emphasized: the whole article uses passive voice consistently and thus presents related facts coherently. I did not see any subjective assumptions or opinions. 
Basically, all evidences (references) are review articles in cell biology and disease research. Though I think more primary articles, instead of the review containing the primary articles, should be added in to specifically support claims, I feel the quality is fine, because the evidences are up to date: though some evidences are from 1900’s, also four new evidences after 2015 were found. Moreover, the introduced methods by the reference used to measure P-gp activity are still being used currently.
One place I think needs to be improved is when the article talking the function of P-gp, it states that ATP hydrolysis is the step causing the conformational change of P-gp, however the order of ATP binding, conformational change, and ATP hydrolysis are still under debating, and some believes the binding of ATP, rather than the hydrolysis of ATP, causes the conformational change. Because no references are listed here, I have no idea based on which reference the conclusion of P-gp function is drawn. I would improve this part by providing up-to-date mechanisms of functions, and might provide multiple mechanisms with clearly cited references.
The reliability of evidences is good, because the evidences either come from literatures (with PMIDs) or from qualified databases, such as Ensemble, or Gene of pubmed. The only exception is one evidence is from FDA website, which is also considered as a reliable recourse.
Missing contents and how it would be improved
From my view of point, the introduction seems informative but highly summarized, missing of even brief examples would make it too condensed to new learners of P-gp. For example, when the article mentions that some cancer cells express P-gp, it does not provide any example of cancer cells; I think if types of cancers could be provided here as examples, the significance of P-gp in cancer drug resistance would be given in a more straightforward way. Another example is when the article states that current P-gp inhibitors work incidentally but not as their main mechanism of action, if a few (1-2) examples, such as verapamil, could be given, the audience would also get a better understanding of this sentence, also professional audiences such as researchers searching for specific inhibitors for P-gp could quickly find useful information here. 
In the ‘Clinical significance, Drug interactions’ part, a variety of P-gp inhibitors are provided, however, for general audience, it seems very hard for them to really know about the inhibitors merely by looking at the names. If the inhibitors could be sorted by the mechanism of actions, or the other ways, the audience could have a much clearer idea about the inhibitors.
In the ‘Clinical significance, Drug interactions’ part, a variety of P-gp inhibitors are provided, however, for general audience, it seems very hard for them to really know about the inhibitors merely by looking at the names. If the inhibitors could be sorted by the mechanism of actions, or the other ways, the audience could have a much clearer idea about the inhibitors.
As mentioned above, because the role of P-gp in cancer drug resistance is not listed even in the ‘Clinical significance, Diseases’ part, therefore I would improve this part by adding the implication of P-gp in resistance to cancer chemotherapeutics.
As a cell biology and cancer researcher, I tried to find the expressional regulation of P-gp but I did not. I think if this piece of information could be added, it could be useful to people doing researches, for example, once know the map of regulatory mechanism of P-gp, researchers can then pick members involved in P-gp regulation as targets. The information of expressional regulation of P-gp does not need to be very detailed with examples, but would better cover a variety of regulatory pathways and achieve in drawing a whole picture. I am planning working on adding a paragraph of regulatory mechanisms of P-gp in human cancer cells.
Woshiau (talk) 13:13, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critiques for the article of P-gp in wikipedia