Computer-Aided Ligand Discovery for Estrogen Receptor Alpha
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast cancer (BCa) is one of the most predominantly diagnosed cancers in women. Notably, 70% of BCa diagnoses are Estrogen Receptor α positive (ERα+) making it a critical therapeutic target. With that, the two subtypes of ER, ERα and ERβ, have contrasting effects on BCa cells. While ERα promotes cancerous activities, ERβ isoform exhibits inhibitory effects on the same. ER-directed small molecule drug discovery for BCa has provided the FDA approved drugs tamoxifen, toremifene, raloxifene and fulvestrant that all bind to the estrogen binding site of the receptor. These ER-directed inhibitors are non-selective in nature and may eventually induce resistance in BCa cells as well as increase the risk of endometrial cancer development. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop novel drugs with alternative ERα targeting mechanisms that can overcome the limitations of conventional anti-ERα therapies. Several functional sites on ERα, such as Activation Function-2 (AF2), DNA binding domain (DBD), and F-domain, have been recently considered as potential targets in the context of drug research and discovery. In this review, we summarize methods of computer-aided drug design (CADD) that have been employed to analyze and explore potential targetable sites on ERα, discuss recent advancement of ERα inhibitor development, and highlight the potential opportunities and challenges of future ERα-directed drug discovery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".