In vitro evaluation of [3H]PI-2620 and structural derivatives in non-Alzheimer's tauopathies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) and non-AD tauopathies such as chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), and corticobasal degeneration (CBD) are characterized by the abnormal aggregation of three-repeat (3R) and/or four-repeat (4R) tau isoforms. Several tau-PET tracers have been applied for human imaging of AD and non-AD tauopathies including [18F]PI-2620.1 Our objective is to evaluate [3H]PI-2620 and two promising structural derivatives, [3H]PI-2014 and [3H]F-4, using in vitro saturation assays and competitive binding assays against new chemical entities based on this scaffold in human AD tissues for comparison with PSP, CBD and CTE tissues. Thin section autoradiography was employed to assess specific binding and distribution of [3H]PI-2620 and [3H]F-4 in fresh-frozen human post-mortem AD, PSP, CBD and CTE tissues. Immunohistochemistry was performed for phospho-tau (AT8) and 4R-tau (RD4). Homogenate filtration binding assays were performed for saturation analysis and competitive binding studies against [3H]PI-2620. All compounds bound with high affinity in AD tissue. In PSP tissue [3H]PI-2620 demonstrated the highest affinity (5.3 nM) and in CBD tissue [3H]F-4 bound with the highest affinity (9.4 nM). Over 40 fluorinated derivatives based on PI-2620 and F-4 were screened in AD and PSP tissue. Notably, compound 2 was the most potent derivative in PSP tissue (Ki = 7.3 nM). By autoradiography, [3H]PI-2620 and [3H]F-4 demonstrated positive signals similar in intensity in AD, PSP and CTE tissues that were displaced by homologous blockade. Binding of both radiotracers aligned with immunostaining for 4R-tau. This work demonstrates that [3H]PI-2620 and [3H]F-4 show promise for imaging 4R-tau aggregates in non-AD tauopathies. PI-2620 continues to serve as a structural scaffold for PET radiotracers with higher affinity for non-AD tau over AD tau.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".