MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145210171 · doi:10.1186/1758-2946-6-s1-o9

Development of cannabinoid receptor (CB 2 R) ligands for application in PET studies - where to attach the radiolabel?

2014· article· en· W2145210171 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert Günther, Rareş‐Petru Moldovan, Corinna Lueg, Winnie Deuther‐Conrad, Bernhard Wünsch, Peter Brust

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cheminformatics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannabinoid receptorPositron emission tomographyReceptorChemistryCannabinoidHigh resolutionLigand (biochemistry)Docking (animal)CarbazoleStereochemistryBiochemistryNuclear medicineMedicineOrganic chemistryAntagonist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cannabinoid receptors type 2 (CB2R) are involved in many physiological processes but their expression level in healthy and diseased brain has not been unravelled. With positron emission tomography (PET) it is possible to monitor quantitatively very low amounts of compounds labelled with positron emitting isotopes like 18F in living organisms at high spatial resolution. For application in clinical research, such radiotracers have to show high selectivity and affinity to the target protein. A series of fluorinated N-carbazolyl-oxadiazolyl-propionamides [1] was synthesised and the affinity towards the human CB2R was measured in receptor binding studies. Here, we combine our CB2R receptor model with 3D-QSAR data [2] to support molecular docking studies employing the MOE software (Version 2012.12 Chemical Computing Group Inc. Montreal. http://www.chemcomp.com). The studies revealed that both the primarily investigated compound 2 and the 2-fluoroethyl substituted carbazole derivative 1 (Ki = 3.6 nM) fits well into the binding pocket. Attachment of the fluorine at different positions of the structure does not lead to significantly different poses in accordance with the experimental data. Organ distribution studies on CD1-mice verified our prediction, [3] that [18F]1 and [18F]2 can cross the blood-brain barrier. Figure 1 Compounds 1 and 2 fitted into the binding pocket of the CB2R receptor model.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of CheminformaticsSame topicPharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and EffectsFrench-language works237,207