MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996889416 · doi:10.1021/ml200084n

Agonists for the Chemokine Receptor CXCR4

2011· article· en· W1996889416 on OpenAlexafffund
Marilou Lefrançois, Marie‐Reine Lefebvre, Geneviève Saint-Onge, Philip E. Boulais, Simon Lamothe, Richard Leduc, Pierre Lavigne, Nikolaus Heveker, Emanuel Escher

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Medicinal Chemistry Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemokine receptors and signaling
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAgonistChimera (genetics)Chemokine receptorReceptorChemokineCXCR4ChemistryPartial agonistPeptideChemotaxisG protein-coupled receptorCell biologyPharmacologyBiologyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of agonists for the chemokine receptor CXCR4 could provide promising therapeutic candidates. On the basis of previously forwarded two site model of chemokine-receptor interactions, we hypothesized that linking the agonistic N-terminus of SDF-1 to the T140 backbone would yield new high-affinity agonists of CXCR4. We developed chimeras with the agonistic SDF-1 N-terminus grafted to a T140 side chain and tested their binding affinity and chemotactic agonist activity. While chimeras with the peptide grafted onto position 12 of T140 remained high-affinity antagonists, those bearing the peptide on position 14 were in part agonists. One chimera was a full CXCR4 agonist with 25 nM affinity, and several chimeras showed low nanomolar affinities with partial agonist activity. Our results confirmed that we have developed high-affinity agonists of CXCR4.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 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

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Medicinal Chemistry LettersSame topicChemokine receptors and signalingFrench-language works237,207