Drugs That Bind to α-Synuclein: Neuroprotective or Neurotoxic?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The misfolding of α-synuclein is a critical event in the death of dopaminergic neurons and the progression of Parkinson's disease. Drugs that bind to α-synuclein and form a loop structure between the N- and C-terminus tend to be neuroprotective, whereas others that cause a more compact structure tend to be neurotoxic. The binding of several natural products and other drugs that are involved in dopamine metabolism were investigated by nanopore analysis and isothermal titration calorimetry. The antinausea drugs, cinnarizine and metoclopramide, do not bind to α-synuclein, whereas amphetamine and the herbicides, paraquat and rotenone, bind tightly and cause α-synuclein to adopt a more compact conformation. The recreational drug, cocaine, binds to α-synuclein, whereas heroin and methadone do not. Metformin, which is prescribed for diabetes and is neuroprotective, binds well without causing α-synuclein to adopt a more compact conformation. Methylphenidate (ritalin) binds to sites in both the N- and C-terminus and causes α-synuclein to adopt a loop conformation. In contrast, amphetamine only binds to the N-terminus. Except for cinnarizine and metoclopramide, there is a good correlation between the mode of binding to α-synuclein and whether a drug is neuroprotective or neurotoxic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".