MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390192956 · doi:10.1002/alz.076912

The Emory‐Sage‐SGC TREAT‐AD Center: Tool development for novel targets in Alzheimer’s Disease

2023· article· en· W4390192956 on OpenAlexaff
Karina Leal, Alison D. Axtman, Ranjita Betarbet, Paul E. Brennan, Gregory W. Carter, Haian Fu, Anna K Greenwood, Frank M. Longo, A.M. Edwards, Allan I. Levey

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoStructural Genomics Consortium
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDruggabilityPrioritizationDiseaseDrug developmentComputational biologyDrug discoverySet (abstract data type)Computer scienceMedicineBioinformaticsBiologyDrugPharmacologyGeneticsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is one of the most prevalent neurodegenerative diseases affecting over 55 million people worldwide. Over the last 20 years, AD research has focused on a limited number of potential drug targets. Given the demonstrated heterogeneity of the disease in biological and genetic components, there is a need to evaluate a broad range of therapeutic hypotheses for target prioritization and development. The Emory‐Sage‐SGC TREAT‐AD Center is generating and openly distributing validated experimental tools necessary to test target predictions generated through sequence‐based characterization of human disease state. We believe that these tools and reagents, including chemical and biological probes that target the multifaceted dysregulation in the brains of AD patients will advance the discovery of potential drug targets for AD. Method Our Center uses integrated computational approaches to identify target predictions from a set of prioritized therapeutic hypotheses. The current target portfolio was assembled by evaluating prioritized understudied proteins by the Accelerating Medicines Partnership in AD (AMP‐AD) consortium and additional NIA‐supported AD consortia. Nominated targets were evaluated by calculating an unbiased target risk score, literature score, and druggability. Targets are then mapped to 16 biological domains (BDs) that describe and codify the different processes that are dysregulated in AD and prioritized based on multiple lines of evidence for overall AD‐risk. Targets that meet criteria for development are evaluated to identify a set of experimental reagents necessary for hypothesis testing, termed a “target enablement package (TEP). Result We have prioritized more than 30 understudied targets for TEP development. For each understudied target, a TEP includes expression constructs, purified protein and methods, validated knockout cell lines, and antibody validation. All reagents are developed to meet established quality criteria. For a subset of tractable targets additional TEP components include assay development, crystal structures, screening, and probe development. Advanced targets include SYK, DDX1, SFRP1, SDC4, ARHGEF2, and CAPN2. TREAT‐AD investigators place all data, knowledge, reagents, and tools into the open domain with no intellectual property claims. Conclusion All data, protocols, reagent sets, and chemical tools will be made widely available on the AD Knowledge Portal. For more information see www.treatad.org.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207