MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320060843 · doi:10.3390/ecmc2022-13472

In Silico Fragment-Based Drug Design and Molecular Docking of Tranilast Analogues as Potential Inhibitors of Transforming Growth Factor- β Receptor Type 1

2022· article· en· W4320060843 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nusaiba A. Babiker, Ahmed T. Negmeldin, Eman M. El‐labbad

Bibliographic record

VenueECMC 2022 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicTGF-β signaling in diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn silicoTranilastDocking (animal)DrugChemistryComputational biologyPharmacologyBiologyBiochemistryMedicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transforming Growth Factor- β Receptor type 1 (TGF-βR1) is an important anticancer target involved in promoting cell proliferation, progression, and metastasis through the induction of angiogenesis and suppression of immunological responses during the late stage of malignancy. Tranilast was initially approved for the treatment of bronchial asthma and allergic conditions in 1982. Later, it was revealed that Tranilast had numerous effects on cancer hallmarks, including immune evasion and sustained proliferation via the inhibition of TGF-βR1. This research describes the design of a novel series of anthranilate derivatives having various modes of interactions with TGF-βR1 compared with Tranilast. A database of novel Tranilast analogues was generated using Molecular Operating Environment Software (MOE 2020.09, Chemical Computing Group CCG, Montréal, Canada) using fragment-based drug design. Representative compounds were selected from the database and docked in the identified binding site of TGF-βR1. Several compounds showed higher binding affinity for TGF-βR1 compared with the lead compound in this work, Tranilast. Compounds with high docking scores contained a positively charged amine group that interacted with Asp290 or a negatively charged carboxylate group with Lys 335 in the TGF-βR1 ATP binding site. Additionally, compounds containing an aromatic group showed high docking scores through interacting with Ser287, Lys337, or Ile 211. Compounds A11, A14, A16, and B5 which had the best poses in terms of binding interactions and docking scores to the binding site will be considered for further synthesis and biological evaluation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECMC 2022Same topicTGF-β signaling in diseasesFrench-language works237,207