MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030863517 · doi:10.1002/biot.200500039

Yeast as a tool to uncover the cellular targets of drugs

2006· review· en· W2030863517 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher M. Sturgeon, Danielle Kemmer, Hilary Anderson, Michel Roberge

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology Journal · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFungal and yeast genetics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYeastSaccharomyces cerevisiaeComputational biologyDrugBiologyGeneMechanism (biology)Model organismDrug actionOrganismGene expressionMechanism of actionGeneticsPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge of the spectrum of cellular proteins targeted by experimental therapeutic agents would greatly facilitate drug development. However, identifying the targets of drugs is a daunting challenge. The yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a valuable model organism for human diseases and pathways because it is genetically tractable and shares many functional homolog with humans. In yeast, it is possible to increase or decrease the expression level of essentially every gene and measure changes in drug sensitivity to uncover potential targets. It is also possible to infer mechanism of action from comparing the changes in mRNA expression elicited by drug treatment with those induced by gene deletions or by other drugs. Proteins that bind drugs directly can be identified using yeast protein chips. This review of the use of yeast for discovering targets of drugs discusses the advantages and drawbacks of each approach and how combining methods may reveal targets more efficiently.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.004

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 head0.298
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations54
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology JournalSame topicFungal and yeast genetics researchFrench-language works237,207