MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338225958 · doi:10.1039/b512310k

‘Magic bullets’ for bone diseases: progress in rational design of bone-seeking medicinal agents

2006· review· en· W2338225958 on OpenAlexaff
Sufeng Zhang, Geeti Gangal, Hasan Uludağ

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Society Reviews · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagic bulletMedicineComputer scienceBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An ideal therapeutic agent for bone diseases should act solely on bone tissue with no pharmacological activity at other anatomical sites. Current therapeutic agents, however, do not usually display a preferential affinity to bones and non-specifically distribute throughout the body after administration. Attempts to design bone-specific agents have relied on engineering a desired therapeutic agent with bone-seeking molecules so that the latter delivers the therapeutic agents specifically to bones. In this critical review, we summarize the latest attempts to engineer bone-seeking therapeutic agents based on formulating therapeutic agents with bisphosphonates, a class of compounds with high affinity to biological apatite. We first provide a relevant summary of the structure of bone mineral and bisphosphonates, highlighting the mode of interaction between these two entities. The use of bisphosphonates in the diagnosis of bone diseases is then presented, since this application helps us to understand the bone-carrier properties of bisphosphonates under physiological conditions. A summary of recent attempts to formulate bisphosphonates with traditional therapeutic agents to restrict their activities to bone tissues is then provided, with special emphasis on the structure-function relationships of the engineered compounds. Finally, attempts to use bisphosphonates to deliver macromolecular therapeutics (i.e., proteins) are summarized, based on recent data from the authors' lab. The collective research into bone-seeking medicinal agents is progressively laying the foundation for next-generation 'magic bullets' that display desirable activities at the disease sites with no undesirable activity on other organ systems. (164 references.).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations237
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Society ReviewsSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207