MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022961858 · doi:10.1039/b915870g

Glycosidase inhibition: assessing mimicry of the transition state

2009· review· en· W2022961858 on OpenAlexafffund
T.M. Gloster, G.J. Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganic & Biomolecular Chemistry · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCarbohydrate Chemistry and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSimon Fraser UniversityWellcome Trust
KeywordsGlycoside hydrolaseTransition state analogGlycosidic bondGlycoconjugateChemistryEnzymeTransition (genetics)GlycosideMolecular mimicryHydrolysisBiochemistryStereochemistryBiologyActive siteImmunologyAntigenGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glycoside hydrolases, the enzymes responsible for hydrolysis of the glycosidic bond in di-, oligo- and polysaccharides, and glycoconjugates, are ubiquitous in Nature and fundamental to existence. The extreme stability of the glycosidic bond has meant these enzymes have evolved into highly proficient catalysts, with an estimated 10(17) fold rate enhancement over the uncatalysed reaction. Such rate enhancements mean that enzymes bind the substrate at the transition state with extraordinary affinity; the dissociation constant for the transition state is predicted to be 10(-22) M. Inhibition of glycoside hydrolases has widespread application in the treatment of viral infections, such as influenza and HIV, lysosomal storage disorders, cancer and diabetes. If inhibitors are designed to mimic the transition state, it should be possible to harness some of the transition state affinity, resulting in highly potent and specific drugs. Here we examine a number of glycosidase inhibitors which have been developed over the past half century, either by Nature or synthetically by man. A number of criteria have been proposed to ascertain which of these inhibitors are true transition state mimics, but these features have only be critically investigated in a very few cases.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations242
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganic & Biomolecular ChemistrySame topicCarbohydrate Chemistry and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207