Phosphorylation of Isocarbostyril‐ and Difluorophenyl‐Nucleoside Thymidine Mimics by the Human Deoxynucleoside Kinases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thymidine mimics isocarbostyril nucleosides and difluorophenyl nucleosides were tested as deoxynucleoside kinase substrates using recombinant human cytosolic thymidine kinase (TK1) and deoxycytidine kinase (dCK), and mitochondrial thymidine kinase (TK2) and deoxyguanosine kinase (dGK). The isocarbostyril nucleoside compound 1-(2-deoxy-beta-D-ribofuranosyl)-isocarbostyril (EN1) was a poor substrate with all the enzymes. The phosphorylation rates of EN1 with TK1 and TK2 were <1% relative to Thd, where as the phosphorylation rates for EN1 were 1.4% and 1.1% with dCK and dGK relative to dCyd and dGuo, respectively. The analogue 1-(2-deoxy-beta-D-ribofuranosyl)-7-iodoisocarbostyril (EN2) showed poor relative-phosphorylation efficiencies (kcat/Km) with both TK1 and dGK, but not with TK2. The kcat/Km value for EN2 with TK2 was 12.6% relative to that for Thd. Of the difluorophenyl nucleosides, 5-(1'-(2'-deoxy-beta-D-ribofuranosyl))-2,4-difluorotoluene (JW1) and 1-(1'-(2'-deoxy-beta-D-ribofuranosyl))-2,4-difluoro-5-iodobenzene (JW2) were substrates for TK1 with phosphorylation efficiencies of about 5% relative to that for Thd. Both analogues were considerably more efficient substrates for TK2, with kcat/Km values of 45% relative to that for Thd. 2,5-Difluoro-4-[1-(2-deoxy-beta-L-ribofuranosyl)]-aniline (JW5), a L-nucleoside mimic, was phosphorylated up to 15% as efficiently as deoxycytidine by dCK. These data provide a possible explanation for the previously reported lack of cytotoxicity of the isocarbostyril- and difluorophenyl nucleosides, but potential mitochondrial effects of EN2, JW1 and JW2 should be further investigated.
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".