MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1604720580 · doi:10.3390/molecules20058316

Structure Based Modeling of Small Molecules Binding to the TLR7 by Atomistic Level Simulations

2015· article· en· W1604720580 on OpenAlexafffund
Francesco Gentile, Marco A. Deriu, Ginevra Licandro, Alessio Prunotto, Andrea Danani, Jack A. Tuszyński

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecules · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersLi Ka Shing Institute of Virology, University of AlbertaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPolitecnico di Torino
KeywordsTLR7In silicoReceptorDocking (animal)Computational biologyMolecular dynamicsChemistryMechanism (biology)BiophysicsSmall moleculeMolecular modelToll-like receptorBiologyBiochemistryInnate immune systemGeneMedicineComputational chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Toll-Like Receptors (TLR) are a large family of proteins involved in the immune system response. Both the activation and the inhibition of these receptors can have positive effects on several diseases, including viral pathologies and cancer, therefore prompting the development of new compounds. In order to provide new indications for the design of Toll-Like Receptor 7 (TLR7)-targeting drugs, the mechanism of interaction between the TLR7 and two important classes of agonists (imidazoquinoline and adenine derivatives) was investigated through docking and Molecular Dynamics simulations. To perform the computational analysis, a new model for the dimeric form of the receptors was necessary and therefore created. Qualitative and quantitative differences between agonists and inactive compounds were determined. The in silico results were compared with previous experimental observations and employed to define the ligand binding mechanism of TLR7.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMoleculesSame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207