MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220956251 · doi:10.1002/cmdc.202200092

Jumping from Fragment to Drug via Smart Scaffolds

2022· article· en· W4220956251 on OpenAlexafffund
Majid D. Farahani, Tanos C. C. França, Saba Alapour, Fatma Shahout, Richard Boulon, Mustapha Iddir, Michael Maddalena, Yann Ayotte, Steven R. LaPlante

Bibliographic record

VenueChemMedChem · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersMitacs
KeywordsFragment (logic)JumpingDrugDrug discoveryComputational biologyChemistryCombinatorial chemistryComputer sciencePharmacologyMedicineBiologyBiochemistryProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A focused drug repurposing approach is described where an FDA‐approved drug is rationally selected for biological testing based on structural similarities to a fragment compound found to bind a target protein by an NMR screen. The approach is demonstrated by first screening a curated fragment library using 19 F NMR to discover a quality binder to ACE2, the human receptor required for entry and infection by the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus. Based on this binder, a highly related scaffold was derived and used as a “smart scaffold” or template in a computer‐aided finger‐print search of a library of FDA‐approved or marketed drugs. The most interesting structural match involved the drug vortioxetine which was then experimentally shown by NMR spectroscopy to bind directly to human ACE2. Also, an ELISA assay showed that the drug inhibits the interaction of human ACE2 to the SARS‐CoV‐2 receptor‐binding‐domain (RBD). Moreover, our cell‐culture infectivity assay confirmed that vortioxetine is active against SARS‐CoV‐2 and inhibits viral replication. Thus, the use of “smart scaffolds” based on binders from fragment screens may have general utility for identifying candidates of FDA‐approved or marketed drugs as a rapid repurposing strategy. Similar approaches can be envisioned for other fields involving small‐molecule chemical applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemMedChemSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207