The Pentapeptide QYNAD Does Not Inhibit Neuronal Network Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Controversial data was published about the sodium channel-blocking effect of the endogenous pentapeptide QYNAD, which is elevated in patients with multiple sclerosis and Guillain-Barré-syndrome. In some experiments with single cells and nerve preparations QYNAD inhibited sodium currents to the same extent as the known sodium channel blocker lidocaine whereas in other laboratory testing QYNAD failed to show any effect at all. METHODS: Micro-electrode arrays with cultured neuronal networks are highly suitable to determine neuroactive activity of applied substances. The impact on electrophysiological parameter changes was compared between QYNAD and the established sodium channel blockers lidocaine and tetrodotoxin (TTX). RESULTS: QYNAD did not alter network activity whereas the sodium channel blockers lidocaine (IC50 14.9 micorM) and tetrodotoxin (IC50 1.1 nM) reversibly decreased network activity in similar concentrations as in patch-clamp experiments. This decrease of spontaneous electrophysiological activity was achieved by prolonging the interburst-interval. CONCLUSION: Although QYNAD might have mild effects on single-cell sodium currents, there is no significant effect on neuronal network function. These results raise concerns about QYNAD exhibiting a relevant impact on functional disability of the central nervous system in patients.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".