MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055610345 · doi:10.1021/jm7011485

An Updated Steroid Benchmark Set and Its Application in the Discovery of Novel Nanomolar Ligands of Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin

2008· article· en· W2055610345 on OpenAlexaff
Artem Cherkasov, Fuqiang Ban, Osvaldo A. Santos‐Filho, Nels Thorsteinson, Magid Fallahi, Geoffrey L. Hammond

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medicinal Chemistry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantitative structure–activity relationshipSex hormone-binding globulinChemistryComputational biologyDocking (animal)Virtual screeningBenchmark (surveying)Drug discoveryNonsteroidalMolecular modelStereochemistryHormoneBiochemistryBiologyPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A benchmark data set of steroids with known affinity for sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) has been widely used to validate popular molecular field-based QSAR techniques. We have expanded the data set by adding a number of nonsteroidal SHBG ligands identified both from the literature and in our previous experimental studies. This updated molecular set has been used herein to develop 4D QSAR models based on "inductive" descriptors and to gain insight into the molecular basis of protein-ligand interactions. Molecular alignment was generated by means of docking active compounds into the active site of the SHBG. Surprisingly, the alignment of the benchmark steroids contradicted the classical ligand-based alignment utilized in previous CoMFA and CoMSIA models yet afforded models with higher statistical significance and predictive power. The resulting QSAR models combined with CoMFA and CoMSiA models as well as structure-based virtual screening allowed discovering several low-micromolar to nanomolar nonsteroidal inhibitors for human SHBG.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations42
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medicinal ChemistrySame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207