MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789075292 · doi:10.18433/jpps29455

The Remarkable Cationic Peptides: A Boon to Pharmaceutical Sciences?

2018· review· en· W2789075292 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruchi Omar, Arpita Yadav

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDruggabilityAntimicrobial peptidesChemistryHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Computational biologyCombinatorial chemistryPharmacophoreBiologyBiochemistryPeptideVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this opinion article, the authors discuss a number of interesting, beneficial properties of naturally occurring and synthetic cationic antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) with the prospective aim of bringing these compounds into therapeutic use to avoid antibiotic resistance and utilize their numerous properties. The structural diversity and the conformational freedom of these compounds adversely affects their mechanistic elucidation. Our molecular level mechanistic exploration of these peptides has shown their ion carriage properties and systematically explains their antibiotic activity through disruption of bacterial cell homeostasis and inhibition of 14-α demethylase enzyme. We have also shown self-assemblage in AMPs in different nanoparticulate and tubular forms. Some AMPs possess cell penetration capability and their co-administration with drug enhances antibacterial activity through a non-disruptive mechanism. The anti-HIV activity of AMPs has been explained based on their non-covalent, non-base-pair base-pair type interactions with HIV viral ssRNA template. Design of peptidomimetic compounds with enhanced druggability based on our mechanistic explorations will definitely lead to better non-toxic drugs with antibacterial, anti-HIV activity and may contribute towards development of efficient drug delivery systems. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical SciencesSame topicAntimicrobial Peptides and ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207