MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075465550 · doi:10.1002/cmdc.201400024

Simplified Silvestrol Analogues with Potent Cytotoxic Activity

2014· article· en· W2075465550 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bill C. Hawkins, Lisa Lindqvist, Duong Nhu, Phillip P. Sharp, David Segal, Andrew K. Powell, Michael G. Campbell, Eileen Ryan, Jennifer M. Chambers, Jonathan M. White, Mark A. Rizzacasa, Guillaume Lessène, David C.S. Huang, Christopher J. Burns

Bibliographic record

VenueChemMedChem · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhytochemical compounds biological activities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIn vivoIn vitroCytotoxic T cellBiochemistryChemistryCytotoxicityCancer cellMembrane permeabilityCell cultureBiologyStereochemistryCancerMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complex natural products silvestrol (1) and episilvestrol (2) are inhibitors of translation initiation through binding to the DEAD-box helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A). Both compounds are potently cytotoxic to cancer cells in vitro, and 1 has demonstrated efficacy in vivo in several xenograft cancer models. Here we show that 2 has limited plasma membrane permeability and is metabolized in liver microsomes in a manner consistent with that reported for 1. In addition, we have prepared a series of analogues of these compounds where the complex pseudo-sugar at C6 has been replaced with chemically simpler moieties to improve drug-likeness. Selected compounds from this work possess excellent activity in biochemical and cellular translation assays with potent activity against leukemia cell lines.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemMedChemSame topicPhytochemical compounds biological activitiesFrench-language works237,207