MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190632281 · doi:10.1016/j.xpro.2021.100717

Assessing reversible and irreversible binding effects of kinase covalent inhibitors through ADP-Glo assays

2021· article· en· W3190632281 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Martin Schröder, A. Chaikuad

Bibliographic record

VenueSTAR Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicClick Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJanssen PharmaceuticalsGenentechInnovative Medicines InitiativeOntario Genomics InstituteMerck KGaAGenome CanadaBoehringer IngelheimBristol-Myers SquibbTakeda Pharmaceutical CompanyPfizer
KeywordsCovalent bondChemistryEnzymeKinaseBiochemistryCovalent bindingPotencyBiophysicsCombinatorial chemistryPharmacologyIn vitroBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Typical enzymatic inhibition assays often demonstrate improved potency for kinase covalent inhibitors compared to reversible inhibitors. This can primarily be attributed to the irreversible mode of action and could affect the evaluations of the ATP-competitive nature of covalent inhibitors, hindering optimization of these compounds. Here, we describe a version of ADP-Glo assay, in which modification of inhibitor incubation time in the presence or absence of ATP enables a quick assessment of relative reversible and irreversible effects of kinase covalent inhibitors. For complete details on the use and execution of this protocol, please refer to Schröder et al. (2020).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.300 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTAR ProtocolsSame topicClick Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207