Network-Based Prediction of Side Effects of Repurposed Antihypertensive Sartans against COVID-19 via Proteome and Drug-Target Interactomes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential of targeting the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System (RAAS) as a treatment for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently under investigation. One way to combat this disease involves the repurposing of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), which are antihypertensive drugs, because they bind to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), which in turn interacts with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein. However, there has been no in silico analysis of the potential toxicity risks associated with the use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. To address this, a network-based bioinformatics methodology was used to investigate the potential side effects of known Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved antihypertensive drugs, Sartans. This involved identifying the human proteins targeted by these drugs, their first neighbors, and any drugs that bind to them using publicly available experimentally supported data, and subsequently constructing proteomes and protein-drug interactomes. This methodology was also applied to Pfizer's Paxlovid, an antiviral drug approved by the FDA for emergency use in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 treatment. The study compares the results for both drug categories and examines the potential for off-target effects, undesirable involvement in various biological processes and diseases, possible drug interactions, and the potential reduction in drug efficiency resulting from proteoform identification.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it