MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390046003 · doi:10.1126/science.adh1859

Molecular determinants of ligand efficacy and potency in GPCR signaling

2023· article· en· W4390046003 on OpenAlexaff
Franziska M. Heydenreich, Maria Martí-Solano, Manbir Sandhu, Brian K. Kobilka, Michel Bouvier, M. Madan Babu

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNovo Nordisk FondenWellcome Trust
KeywordsAllosteric regulationG protein-coupled receptorHeterotrimeric G proteinSignal transductionLigand (biochemistry)ReceptorG proteinFunctional selectivityDrug discoveryChemistryCell signalingBiologyCell biologyComputational biologyBiochemistryPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide-binding protein (G protein)-coupled receptors (GPCRs) bind to extracellular ligands and drugs and modulate intracellular responses through conformational changes. Despite their importance as drug targets, the molecular origins of pharmacological properties such as efficacy (maximum signaling response) and potency (the ligand concentration at half-maximal response) remain poorly understood for any ligand-receptor-signaling system. We used the prototypical adrenaline-β2 adrenergic receptor-G protein system to reveal how specific receptor residues decode and translate the information encoded in a ligand to mediate a signaling response. We present a data science framework to integrate pharmacological and structural data to uncover structural changes and allosteric networks relevant for ligand pharmacology. These methods can be tailored to study any ligand-receptor-signaling system, and the principles open possibilities for designing orthosteric and allosteric compounds with defined signaling properties.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations67
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicReceptor Mechanisms and SignalingFrench-language works237,207