Molecular determinants of pro-arrhythmia proclivity of d- and l-sotalol via a multi-scale modeling pipeline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drug isomers may differ in their proarrhythmia risk. An interesting example is the drug sotalol, an antiarrhythmic drug comprising d- and l- enantiomers that both block the hERG cardiac potassium channel and confer differing degrees of proarrhythmic risk. We developed a multi-scale in silico pipeline focusing on hERG channel - drug interactions and used it to probe and predict the mechanisms of pro-arrhythmia risks of the two enantiomers of sotalol. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations predicted comparable hERG channel binding affinities for d- and l-sotalol, which were validated with electrophysiology experiments. MD derived thermodynamic and kinetic parameters were used to build multi-scale functional computational models of cardiac electrophysiology at the cell and tissue scales. Functional models were used to predict inactivated state binding affinities to recapitulate electrocardiogram (ECG) QT interval prolongation observed in clinical data. Our study demonstrates how modeling and simulation can be applied to predict drug effects from the atom to the rhythm for dl-sotalol and also increased proarrhythmia proclivity of d- vs. l-sotalol when accounting for stereospecific beta-adrenergic receptor blocking.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".