MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1834782550 · doi:10.25011/cim.v31i5.4875

Chemical biology — understanding biology and advancing therapy

2008· article· en· W1834782550 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Aaron D. Schimmer

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and investigative medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicUbiquitin and proteasome pathways
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersLeukemia and Lymphoma SocietyMultiple Myeloma Research Foundation
KeywordsChemical biologyCancer therapyComputational biologyDrug discoveryNanotechnologyBiologyEngineering ethicsMedicineCancerBioinformaticsEngineeringBiochemistryInternal medicineMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemical biology is a new academic discipline whose goals are to understand biological systems using chemistry and chemical compounds. In addition to serving as important biological probes, some of these small molecules could be useful therapeutically. This review will discuss how advances in chemical biology by academics can aid in the discovery of new anti-cancer agents. Specifically, novel molecules can be useful tools to validate a potential target in a disease site and help provide the rationale for a clinical trial with a related molecule developed by industry. These novel molecules can also be developed for clinical use, although obstacles to this approach are recognized. Finally, this review discusses the opportunities to identify off-patent drugs with previously unrecognized anti-cancer activity and how the prior data on the drug would permit it to be rapidly repurposed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.142 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and investigative medicineSame topicUbiquitin and proteasome pathwaysFrench-language works237,207