MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Maltase Glucoamylase (MGAM): Putting Diabetes in its Place! (LB85)

2014· article· en· W1490417858 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Burwash, Alessandro Eid‐Ricci, Priya Muradia, Adesuwa Ero, Alexandra Dolganow, Iris Liu, Susan M. Wall, Lyann Sim

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNatural Antidiabetic Agents Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcarboseChemistryMaltaseDiabetes mellitusBiochemistryPharmacologyEnzymeInternal medicineEndocrinologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By 2050 1 in 3 Americans will have type 2 diabetes, a disease characterized by excessively high blood glucose levels. Typically, diabetes is treated with regular insulin injections and blood sugar monitoring. For centuries, Aryuvedic medicine has had a massive following, in part due to its natural remedies for diabetes deriving from an Indian herb, Salacia reticulata . These extracts were found to contain α‐glucosidase inhibitors, a class of anti‐diabetic drugs that competitively inhibit intestinal starch‐digesting enzymes such as human Maltase Glucoamylase (MGAM). As MGAM is responsible for catalyzing the final glucose‐releasing step of starch digestion, inhibiting MGAM would delay glucose absorption into the bloodstream. The Ashbury SMART (Students Modeling a Research Topic) Team modeled MGAM in complex with two inhibitors, salacinol and Acarbose, (PDBID 2QMJ & 3L4Z) using Jmol and 3D printing technology. The binding of ‐glucosidase inhibitor salacinol, derived from Salacia reticulata extracts and Acarbose, a currently prescribed α‐glucosidase inhibitor will be compared in the MGAM active site. Notably, both inhibitors interact with MGAM residues Asp327 and His600 through ring hydroxyl groups, however salacinol contributes additional electrostatic interaction between its sulfonium center and the catalytic nucleophile Asp443. Grant Funding Source : Supported by grants from the NIH‐SEPA and NIH‐CTSA.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicNatural Antidiabetic Agents StudiesFrench-language works237,207