ARumenamides: A novel class of potential antiarrhythmic compounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Most therapeutics targeting cardiac voltage-gated sodium channels (Nav1.5) attenuate the sodium current (INa) conducted through the pore of the protein. Whereas these drugs may be beneficial for disease states associated with gain-of-function (GoF) in Nav1.5, few attempts have been made to therapeutically treat loss-of-function (LoF) conditions. The primary impediment to designing efficacious therapies for LoF is a tendency for drugs to occlude the Nav1.5 central pore. We hypothesized that molecular candidates with a high affinity for the fenestrations would potentially reduce pore block. Methods and Results: Virtual docking was performed on 21 compounds, selected based on their affinity for the fenestrations in Nav1.5, which included a class of sulfonamides and carboxamides we identify as ARumenamide (AR). Six ARs, AR-051, AR-189, AR-674, AR-802, AR-807 and AR-811, were further docked against Nav1.5 built on NavAb and rNav1.5. Based on the virtual docking results, these particular ARs have a high affinity for Domain III-IV and Domain VI-I fenestrations. Upon functional characterization, a trend was observed in the effects of the six ARs on INa. An inverse correlation was established between the aromaticity of the AR’s functional moieties and compound block. Due to its aromaticity, AR-811 blocked INa the least compared with other aromatic ARs, which also decelerated fast inactivation onset. AR-674, with its aliphatic functional group, significantly suppresses INa and enhances use-dependence in Nav1.5. AR-802 and AR-811, in particular, decelerated fast inactivation kinetics in the most common Brugada Syndrome Type 1 and Long-QT Syndrome Type 3 mutant, E1784K, without affecting peak or persistent INa. Conclusion: Our hypothesis that LoF in Nav1.5 may be therapeutically treated was supported by the discovery of ARs, which appear to preferentially block the fenestrations. ARs with aromatic functional groups as opposed to aliphatic groups efficaciously maintained Nav1.5 availability. We predict that these bulkier side groups may have a higher affinity for the hydrophobic milieu of the fenestrations, remaining there rather than in the central pore of the channel. Future refinements of AR compound structures and additional validation by molecular dynamic simulations and screening against more Brugada variants will further support their potential benefits in treating certain LoF cardiac arrhythmias.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".