MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386525912 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3182844/v1

Structure-guided design of pyridinyl-indole 4R-tau PET radiotracers: Development of [18F]OXD-2314 for human use

2023· preprint· en· W4386525912 on OpenAlexafffund
Neil Vasdev, Anton Lindberg, Junchao Tong, Scott Mason, Daniel Sohn, Johan Sandell, Peter Ström, Jeffrey S. Stehouwer, Brian J. Lopresti, Jenny Viklund, Samuel Svensson, Chester A. Mathis

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersUniversity of California, San FranciscoNational Institutes of HealthAzrieli FoundationCanada Research ChairsCurePSP
KeywordsIn silicoPositron emission tomographyIn vivoIndole testHuman brainChemistryBiologyStereochemistryNeuroscienceBiochemistryGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging of tau aggregation in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is helping to map and quantify the in vivo progression of AD pathology. To date, no high-affinity 4-repeat (4R)-tau PET radiopharmaceutical for imaging non-AD tauopathies exists. Herein, the properties of analogues of a first-in-class 4R-tau lead, [18F]OXD-2115, are described. Over 150 analogues of OXD-2115 were synthesized and screened for tau affinity in vitro against [3H]OXD-2115, and in silico models were used to predict brain uptake. [18F]OXD-2314 was identified as a selective, high-affinity non-AD tau PET radiotracer with favorable brain uptake, dosimetry, and radiometabolite profiles in rats and non-human primate and is being translated for first-in-human PET studies.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.328
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments→French-language works237,207→