MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automated synthesis of an 18F-labelled pyridine-based alkylating agent for high yield oligonucleotide conjugation

2009· article· en· W2062923632 on OpenAlexafffund
Elisabeth von Guggenberg, Jayden A. Sader, John S. Wilson, Soraya Shahhosseini, Ingrid L. Koslowsky, Frank Wuest, John R. Mercer

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Radiation and Isotopes · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAustrian Science FundAlberta Cancer Foundation
KeywordsOligonucleotideChemistryYield (engineering)PyridineAcetamideCombinatorial chemistryRadiosynthesisSolid phase extractionDNAChromatographyRadiochemistryExtraction (chemistry)Organic chemistryBiochemistryIn vivoMaterials scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alkylating agents have been shown to be very promising for the radiolabelling of oligonucleotides with fluorine-18. In this report we describe the fully automated synthesis of 2-bromo-N-[3-(2-[(18)F]fluoropyridin-3-yloxy)propyl]acetamide ([(18)F]FPyBrA) utilizing a modular synthesis unit. Reaction conditions for the coupling of this pyridine-based alkylating agent at the 5' end of a fully phosphorothioated random 20-mer DNA sequence were optimized to achieve very high radiochemical yields (>90%) and a maximum specific activity of 5-6 GBq/micromoL. The potential for rapid purification by solid phase extraction without need of chromatographic isolation of the radiolabelled oligonucleotide presents an overall benefit for the application of oligonucleotides in preclinical studies and potential clinical applications.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Radiation and IsotopesSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207