A survey of stapling methods to increase affinity, activity, and stability of ghrelin analogues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth hormone secretagogue receptor (GHSR) is a G protein-coupled receptor which regulates various important physiological and pathophysiological processes in the body such as energy homeostasis, growth hormone secretion and regulation of appetite. As a result, it has been postulated as a potential therapeutic target for the treatment of cancer cachexia and other metabolic disorders, as well as a potential imaging agent target for cancers and cardiovascular diseases. Ghrelin is the primary high affinity endogenous ligand for GHSR and has limited secondary structure in solution, which makes it proteolytically unstable. This inherent instability in ghrelin can be overcome by incorporating helix-inducing staples that stabilize its structure and improve affinity and activity. We present an analysis of different stapling methods at positions 12 and 16 of ghrelin(1-20) analogues with the goal of increasing proteolytic stability and to retain or improve affinity and activity towards the GHSR. Ghrelin(1-20) analogues were modified with a wide range of chemical staples, including a lactam staple, triazole staple, hydrocarbon staple, Glaser staple, and xylene-thioether staple. Once synthesized, the receptor affinity and α-helicity were measured using competitive binding assays and circular dichroism spectroscopy, respectively. Generally, an increase in alpha-helicity using a flexible staple linker led to improved affinity towards GHSR. Ghrelin(1-20) analogues with a lactam, triazole, and hydrocarbon staple resulted in helical analogues with stronger affinity towards GHSR than unstapled ghrelin(1-20), a compound that lacks helical character. Compounds were also investigated for their agonist activity through β-arrestin 1 & 2 recruitment BRET assays and for their metabolic stability through serum stability analysis.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".