MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385477334 · doi:10.1128/mbio.01073-23

Powering up antifungal treatment: using small molecules to unlock the potential of existing therapies

2023· letter· en· W4385477334 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebecca S. Shapiro, Aleeza C. Gerstein

Bibliographic record

VenuemBio · 2023
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and Biological Evaluation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsAzoleFluconazoleMicrobiologyVirulenceAntifungalAntimicrobialFilamentationFungicideBiologyChemistryBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Fungal pathogens are increasingly appreciated as a significant infectious disease challenge. Compared to bacteria, fungal cells are more closely related to human cells, and few classes of antifungal drugs are available. Combination therapy offers a potential solution to reduce the likelihood of resistance acquisition and extend the lifespan of existing antifungals. There has been recent interest in combining first-line drugs with small-molecule adjuvants. In a recent article, Alabi et al. identified 1,4-benzodiazepines as promising molecules to enhance azole activity in pathogenic Candida spp. (P. E. Alabi, C. Gautier, T. P. Murphy, X. Gu, M. Lepas, V. Aimanianda, J. K. Sello, I. V. Ene, 2023, mBio https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.00479-23 ). These molecules have no antifungal activity on their own but exhibited significant potentiation of fluconazole in azole-susceptible and -resistant isolates. Additionally, the 1,4-benzodiazepines increased the fungicidal activity of azoles that are typically fungistatic to Candida spp., inhibited filamentation (a virulence-associated trait), and accordingly increased host survival in Galleria mellonella . This research thus provides another encouraging step on the critical pathway toward reducing mortality due to antimicrobial resistance.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemBioSame topicSynthesis and Biological EvaluationFrench-language works237,207