Open andrewsu opened 4 years ago
The HAS_VARIANT
representation seems a bit more specific and appropriate, but I agree, I also don't know good identifiers for translocation and fusion proteins. I did come across a poorly annotated, unreviewed Uniprot entry for the fusion protein, A1Z199. I don't think is the best option, but at least there's an identifier for it....
On a related note, after reviewing this entry I noticed Drugbank actually has BRC as the pharmacological target of imantinib. ABL is also listed as a target, but pharmacologic action is listed as "Unknown."
In the
imatinib
-CML (ph+)
path, BCR/ABL is referenced as the intermediate node in L20, with the edgesimatinib
INHIBITS
BCR/ABL
, andBCR/ABL
CAUSES
CML (ph+)
. I think this is suboptimal for two reasons.BCR/ABL
references https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/P00519, which only describes the ABL1 protein.imatinib
INHIBITS
ABL1
HAS_VARIANT
BCR/ABL
CAUSES
CML (ph+)
. But having said that, I'm not sure there are any standard identifiers for referencing translocations and/or fusion proteins.