The Therapeutic Potential of Allosteric Ligands for Free Fatty Acid Sensitive GPCRs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the most historically successful therapeutic targets. Despite this success there are many important aspects of GPCR pharmacology and function that have yet to be exploited to their full therapeutic potential. One in particular that has been gaining attention in recent times is that of GPCR ligands that bind to allosteric sites on the receptor distinct from the orthosteric site of the endogenous ligand. As therapeutics, allosteric ligands possess many theoretical advantages over their orthosteric counterparts, including more complex modes of action, improved safety, more physiologically appropriate responses, better target selectivity, and reduced likelihood of desensitisation and tachyphylaxis. Despite these advantages, the development of allosteric ligands is often difficult from a medicinal chemistry standpoint due to the more complex challenge of identifying allosteric leads and their often flat or confusing SAR. The present review will consider the advantages and challenges associated with allosteric GPCR ligands, and examine how the particular properties of these ligands may be exploited to uncover the therapeutic potential for free fatty acid sensitive GPCRs.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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".