Design, Synthesis and Pharmacological Characterization of Endomorphin Analogues with Non‐Cyclic Amino Acid Residues in Position 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of endomorphin-1 (EM-1) and endomorphin-2 (EM-2) analogues, containing non-cyclic amino acids (Ala, D-Ala, beta-Ala, NMeAla, D-NMeAla or Sar) instead of Pro in position 2 was synthesized, where NMeAla = N-methylalanine and Sar = N-methylglycine, sarcosine. The opioid activity profiles of these peptides were determined in mu and delta opioid receptor (MOR and DOR)-representative binding assays and bioassays in vitro, as well as in the mouse hot-plate test in vivo. Finally, the degradation rates of all analogues in the presence of either rat brain homogenate or selected proteolytic enzymes were determined. Analogues of EM-2 were generally more potent than the respective analogues of EM-1. EM-2 analogues with D-Ala or D-NMeAla were about twofold more potent than the parent peptide and were least prone to degradation by brain homogenate, dipeptydyl peptidase IV and aminopeptidase M. In the in vivo test, [D-Ala(2)]EM-2 and [D-NMeAla(2)]EM-2 showed much higher analgesic potency than EM-2 which confirmed the usefulness of structural modifications in obtaining new leads for pain-relief therapeutics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".