MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333762803 · doi:10.1021/jm101012q

Synthetic Analogues of the Microtubule-Stabilizing Sponge Alkaloid Ceratamine A Are More Active than the Natural Product

2010· article· en· W2333762803 on OpenAlexafffund
Matt Nodwell, Carla Zimmerman, Michel Roberge, Raymond J. Andersen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medicinal Chemistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthetic Organic Chemistry Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryPharmacophoreNatural productSubstituentBromineStereochemistryAlkaloidChemical synthesisStructure–activity relationshipCombinatorial chemistryOrganic chemistryIn vitroBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Desbromoceratamine A (3) exhibits significantly less potent activity than the natural product ceratamine A (1) in a cell-based assay for antimitotic activity. Synthesis of the ceratamine A analogue 4 has shown that replacing the bromine atoms in the natural product with methyl groups generates an analogue that is more active than natural ceratamine A (1). Further enhancement of the antimitotic activity of the ceratamine pharmacophore has been achieved in the synthetic analogue 33, which has both bromine atoms replaced with methyl groups and an additional methyl substituent on the amino nitrogen at C-2. An efficient synthetic route has been developed to 33 that should enable the first in vivo evaluation of the new ceratamine microtubule-stabilizing pharmacophore and has provided several additional analogues for structure-activity relationship evaluation.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medicinal ChemistrySame topicSynthetic Organic Chemistry MethodsFrench-language works237,207