MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971603507 · doi:10.1021/ci034270n

Virtual Screening for SARS-CoV Protease Based on KZ7088 Pharmacophore Points

2004· article· en· W1971603507 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacophoreDruggabilityComputational biologyDrug discoverySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Virtual screeningComputer scienceDocking (animal)StereochemistryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ChemistryCombinatorial chemistryBiologyMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pharmacophore modeling can provide valuable insight into ligand-receptor interactions. It can also be used in 3D (dimensional) database searching for potentially finding biologically active compounds and providing new research ideas and directions for drug-discovery projects. To stimulate the structure-based drug design against SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome), a pharmacophore search was conducted over 3.6 millions of compounds based on the atomic coordinates of the complex obtained by docking KZ7088 (a derivative of AG7088) to SARS CoV M(pro) (coronavirus main proteinase), as reportedly recently (Chou, K. C.; Wei, D. Q.; Zhong, W. Z. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2003, 308, 148-151). It has been found that, of the 3.6 millions of compounds screened, 0.07% are with the score satisfying five of the six pharmacophore points. Moreover, each of the hit compounds has been evaluated for druggability according to 13 metrics based on physical, chemical, and structural properties. Of the 0.07% compounds thus retrieved, 17% have a perfect score of 1.0; while 23% with one druggable rule violation, 13% two violations, and 47% more than two violations. If the criterion for druggability is set at a maximum allowance of two rule violations, we obtain that only about 0.03% of the compounds screened are worthy of further tests by experiments. These findings will significantly narrow down the search scope for potential compounds, saving substantial time and money. Finally, the featured templates derived from the current study will also be very useful for guiding the design and synthesis of effective drugs for SARS therapy.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.336
Teacher spread0.295 · 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