Opioids for chronic noncancer pain: a new Canadian practice guideline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Six allosteric HIV-1 entry inhibitor modulators of the chemokine (C-C motif) receptor 5 (CCR5) receptor are compared for their potency as inhibitors of HIV-1 entry [infection of human osteosarcoma (HOS) cells and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC)] and antagonists of chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 3-like 1 [CCL3L1]-mediated internalization of CCR5. This latter activity has been identified as a beneficial action of CCL3L1 in prolonging survival after HIV-1 infection ( Science307:1434-1440, 2005 ). The allosteric nature of these modulators was further confirmed with the finding of a 58-fold (HOS cells) and 282-fold (PBMC) difference in relative potency for blockade of CCL3L1-mediated internalization versus HIV-1 entry. For the CCR5 modulators, statistically significant differences in this ratio were found for maraviroc, vicriviroc, aplaviroc, Sch-C, TAK652, and TAK779. For instance, although TAK652 is 13-fold more potent as an HIV-1 inhibitor (over blockade of CCL3L1-mediated CCR5 internalization), this ratio of potency is reversed for Sch-C (22-fold more potent for CCR5-mediated internalization over HIV-1 entry). Quantitative analyses of the insurmountable antagonism of CCR5 internalization by these ligands suggest that all of them reduce the efficacy of CCL3L1 for CCR5 internalization. The relatively small magnitude of dextral displacement accompanying the depression of maximal responses for aplaviroc, maraviroc and vicriviroc suggests that these modulators have minimal effects on CCL3L1 affinity, although possible receptor reserve effects obscure complete interpretation of this effect. These data are discussed in terms of the possible benefits of sparing natural CCR5 chemokine function in HIV-1 entry inhibition treatment for AIDS involving allosteric inhibitors.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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".