MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pharmacology of human trace amine-associated receptors: Therapeutic opportunities and challenges

2017· review· en· W2734722856 on OpenAlexaff
Mark D. Berry, Raul R. Gainetdinov, Marius C. Hoener, Mohammed Shahid

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacology & Therapeutics · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersRussian Science Foundation
KeywordsPharmacologyTRACE (psycholinguistics)ReceptorChemistryMedicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discovery in 2001 of a G protein-coupled receptor family, subsequently termed trace amine-associated receptors (TAAR), triggered a resurgence of interest in so-called trace amines. Initial optimism quickly faded, however, as the TAAR family presented a series of challenges preventing the use of standard medicinal chemistry and pharmacology technologies. Consequently the development of basic tools for probing TAAR and translating findings from model systems to humans has been problematic. Despite these challenges the last 5years have seen considerable advances, in particular with respect to TAAR1, which appears to function as an endogenous rheostat, maintaining central neurotransmission within defined physiological limits, in part through receptor heterodimerization yielding biased signaling outputs. Regulation of the dopaminergic system is particularly well understood and clinical testing of TAAR1 directed ligands for schizophrenia and psychiatric disorders have begun. In addition, pre-clinical animal models have identified TAAR1 as a novel target for drug addiction and metabolic disorders. Growing evidence also suggests a role for TAARs in regulating immune function. This review critically discusses the current state of TAAR research, highlighting recent developments and focussing on human TAARs, their functions, and clinical implications. Current gaps in knowledge are identified, along with the research reagents and translational tools still required for continued advancement of the field. Through this, a picture emerges of an exciting field on the cusp of significant developments, with the potential to identify new therapeutic leads for some of the major unmet medical needs in the areas of neuropsychiatry and metabolic disorders.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.314
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.108 · 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 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

Citations229
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicReceptor Mechanisms and SignalingFrench-language works237,207