MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964276428 · doi:10.1517/17460441.2011.555394

Small interfering ribonucleic acid design strategies for effective targeting and gene silencing

2011· article· en· W1964276428 on OpenAlexaff
Meenakshi Malhotra, Shruti Nambiar, Venkatesh Rengaswamy, Satya Prakash

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Drug Discovery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmall interfering RNAGene silencingRNA interferenceComputational biologyComputer scienceBiologyGeneRNAGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Gene silencing mediated by siRNAs is becoming a promising therapeutic approach. Although many strategies and technologies have been applied to siRNA design, a key issue lies in the selection of efficient design predictors. Furthermore, the development of systemic siRNA delivery strategies, which would enhance the therapeutic effect, remains a central issue. AREAS COVERED: The review discusses the basic principles of the sequence-specific design criteria of functional siRNAs and possible chemical modifications. Some of the most recent advances in the development of siRNA design algorithms and delivery strategies are also presented. Emphasis is given to the important design rule sets and predictors which determine the functionality of an efficient siRNA. EXPERT OPINION: The potential and limitations of efficient design predictors obtained from computational algorithms play a crucial role in the development of target-specific siRNAs. Furthermore, the future success of RNA interference therapeutics will depend on their ability to efficiently cross the physiological barriers, selectively target cells-of-interest and finally silence the gene-of-interest without any side effects.

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 score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Drug DiscoverySame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207