Identification of Novel GPR55 Modulators Using Cell-Impedance-Based Label-Free Technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The orphan G protein-coupled receptor GPR55 has been proposed as a novel receptor of the endocannabinoid system. However, the validity of this categorization is still under debate mainly because of the lack of potent and selective agonists and antagonists of GPR55. Binding assays are not yet available for GPR55 screening, and discrepancies in GPR55 mediated signaling pathways have been reported. In this context, we have designed and synthesized novel GPR55 ligands based on a chromenopyrazole scaffold. Appraisal of GPR55 activity was accomplished using a label-free cell-impedance-based assay in hGPR55-HEK293 cells. The real-time impedance responses provided an integrative assessment of the cellular consequence to GPR55 stimulation taking into account the different possible signaling pathways. Potent GPR55 partial agonists (14b, 18b, 19b, 20b, and 21-24) have been identified; one of them (14b) being selective versus classical cannabinoid receptors. Upon antagonist treatment, chromenopyrazoles 21-24 inhibited lysophosphatidylinositol (LPI) effect. One of these GPR55 antagonists (21) is fully selective versus classic cannabinoid receptors. Compared to LPI, the predicted physicochemical parameters of the new compounds suggest a clear pharmacokinetic improvement.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".