MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206908084 · doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2021.110996

Insights into the dynamics of ligand-induced dimerisation via mathematical modelling and analysis

2022· article· en· W4206908084 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Carla White, Vivi Rottschäfer, Lloyd Bridge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Theoretical Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Biology Tumor Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of the West of EnglandSwansea UniversityEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilYork University
KeywordsCooperativityLigand (biochemistry)VEGF receptorsReceptorBiophysicsCooperative bindingOrdinary differential equationChemistryComputer scienceBiological systemComputational biologyDifferential equationStatistical physicsBinding siteBiologyMathematicsPhysicsBiochemistryCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor (VEGFR) system plays a role in cancer and many other diseases. It is widely accepted that VEGFR receptors dimerise in response to VEGF binding. However, analysis of these mechanisms and their implications for drug development still requires further exploration. In this paper, we present a mathematical model representing the binding of VEGF to VEGFR and the subsequent ligand-induced dimerisation. A key factor in this work is the qualitative and quantitative effect of binding cooperativity, which describes the effect that the binding of a ligand to a receptor has on the binding of that ligand to a second receptor, and the dimerisation of these receptors. We analyse the ordinary differential equation system at equilibrium, giving analytical solutions for the total amount of ligand bound. For time-course dynamics, we use numerical methods to explore possible behaviours under various parameter regimes, while perturbation analysis is used to understand the intricacies of these behaviours. Our simulation results show an excellent fit to experimental data, towards validating the model.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Theoretical BiologySame topicMathematical Biology Tumor GrowthFrench-language works237,207