MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289787174 · doi:10.30476/ijms.2021.88511.1927

Therapeutic Potential of Bee and Scorpion Venom Phospholipase A2 (PLA2): A Narrative Review.

2022· review· en· W4289787174 on OpenAlexaff
Parisa Soltan‐Alinejad, Hamzeh Alipour, Davood Meharabani, Kourosh Azizi

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScorpionVenomScorpion VenomsMedicineBee venomButhidaePhospholipase A2PharmacologyTraditional medicineBiologyZoologyEcologyEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Venomous arthropods such as scorpions and bees form one of the important groups with an essential role in medical entomology. Their venom possesses a mixture of diverse compounds, such as peptides, some of which have toxic effects, and enzymatic peptide Phospholipase A2 (PLA2) with a pharmacological potential in the treatment of a wide range of diseases. Bee and scorpion venom PLA2 group III has been used in immunotherapy, the treatment of neurodegenerative and inflammatory diseases. They were assessed for antinociceptive, wound healing, anti-cancer, anti-viral, anti-bacterial, anti-parasitic, and anti-angiogenesis effects. PLA2 has been identified in different species of scorpions and bees. The anti-leishmania, anti-bacterial, anti-viral, and anti-malarial activities of scorpion PLA2 still need further investigation. Many pieces of research have been stopped in the laboratory stage, and several studies need vast investigation in the clinical phase to show the pharmacological potential of PLA2. In this review, the medical significance of PLA2 from the venom of two arthropods, namely bees and scorpions, is discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.163
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHealthcare and Venom ResearchFrench-language works237,207