The Combi-Targeting Concept: Chemical Dissection of the Dual Targeting Properties of a Series of “Combi-Triazenes”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The combi-targeting concept postulates that a molecule termed a "combi-molecule" designed to interact with an oncoreceptor on its own and allowed to further degrade to another more stable inhibitor of the latter receptor + a DNA-damaging species should be more potent than the individual combination of the same inhibitor with a DNA-damaging agent in cells expressing the targeted receptor. Recently, using the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) as a target, we demonstrated the feasibility of combi-molecules with dual EGFR/DNA-targeting properties and with the ability to degrade to another potent inhibitor of EGFR. However, despite a clear demonstration of their superior potency when compared with classical combinations in EGFR-expressing cells, the true contribution of each fragment of the combi-molecules to their overall antiproliferative activity remained elusive. Here, we report a structure-function approach whereby a series of quinazoline-based "combi-triazenes" were altered to either abrogate the affinity of the EGFR-targeting quinazoline head or to suppress the DNA-damaging property of the triazene tail. The results showed that (a) inactivation of the quinazoline head by appending an N-methylaniline group to its 4-position reduced EGFR tyrosine kinase (TK) inhibitory activity by ca. 200-fold and decreased the ability of the combi-molecule to block serum-induced growth stimulation in c-erbB2 transfected NIH3T3 cells by ca. 10-fold, (b) abrogation of the alkylating activity or the DNA-damaging potential of the triazene tail by forming 3,3-dimethyltriazenes did not suppress EGFR TK inhibitory affinity but decreased the antiproliferative activity in basal growth assays, and (c) the antiproliferative activities of the monoalkyltriazenes that possessed binary EGFR TK inhibitory and alkylating activities were superior to those of their monotargeted counterparts. The results in toto suggest that each component of the dual targeting property of combi-triazenes plays a critical role in their overall antiproliferative activity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".