MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2886698194 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2018-2503

Abstract 2503: Rational design of small-molecule immune checkpoints' inhibitors

2018· article· en· W2886698194 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled Barakat

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonoclonal antibodyRational designSmall moleculeCancerImmunotherapyImmune systemCancer immunotherapyMedicineCancer researchAntibodyCancer cellImmunologyChemistryBiologyInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Blocking the PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 pathways recently emerged as a ‘game changer' in cancer immunotherapy, leading to the selection of monoclonal-antibodies (MABs) targeting PD-1 as ‘drug of the year' for 2013. Although these antibodies restored exhausted T cells' function to recognize and kill tumor cells, these MABs have numerous disadvantages. These include their very high cost and very severe side effects. Our team has been focused on designing small molecule inhibitors for this pathway. Compared to available MAB therapies, our small molecules may offer a more affordable, more easily administered and better controlled treatment for a variety of cancers. Here, we demonstrate our efforts toward this goal and summarize our data on our promising compounds targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 pathways. Citation Format: Khaled Barakat. Rational design of small-molecule immune checkpoints' inhibitors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2503.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→