Impact of EGFR point mutations on the sensitivity to gefitinib: Insights from comparative structural analyses and molecular dynamics simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emergence of resistant mutations in drug targets represents a serious problem in the targeted chemotherapy. One challenging issue is to understand the atomic-detailed effect of the mutation on the target. Another intriguing issue is how to predict specific mutations that would show up in the clinical setting, leading to drug resistance. By computational approaches, we have investigated structural, dynamics and energetic effects of a series of EGFR mutations identified from the lung cancer patients. We demonstrated mutation L858R caused gefitinib move closer to the hinge region, whereas T790M caused the ligand escape from the binding pocket. In particular, the T790M decreased the size of the hydrophobic slot formed by L718 and G796. This suggests that, to be effective against the T790M mutant, the inhibitors should avoid interactions with the hydrophobic slot. Mutations T790M, L858R, and their combinations are found to cause different conformational redistribution and to perturb the electrostatic potential at the ATP-binding pocket. Normal mode analysis revealed the mutations resulted in changes in the correlated movements in the protein. In an attempt to develop a computational descriptor for predicting the functional effect of EGFR mutations, we have developed a Plarm algorithm, and the Plarm score was found to be an excellent predictor of the functional impact of six clinical relevant mutations in EGFR tyrosine kinase domains, including T790M, L858R, G719C, L861Q, T790M + L858R double mutant, and delL747-P753insS. The Plarm algorithm could be readily extended to investigate other drug targets.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".