Amodiaquine Nonspecifically Binds Double Stranded and Three‐Way Junction DNA Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 4-aminoquinoline class of compounds includes the important antimalarial compounds amodiaquine and chloroquine. Despite their medicinal importance, the mode of action of these compounds is poorly understood. In a previous study we observed these compounds, as well as quinine and mefloquine, tightly bind the DNA cocaine-binding aptamer. Here, we further explore the range of nucleic acid structures bound by these compounds. To gauge a wide range of binding affinities, we used isothermal titration calorimetry to explore high affinity binding (nM to tens of μM) and NMR spectroscopy to assay weak binding biding in the hundreds of micromolar range. We find that amodiaquine tightly binds all double stranded DNA structures explored. Mefloquine binds double stranded DNA duplex molecules tightly and weakly associates with a three-way junction DNA construct. Quinine and chloroquine only weakly bind duplex DNA but do not tightly bind any of the DNA constructs explored. A simulation of the free energy of binding of these ligands to the Dickerson-Drew dodecamer resulted in an excellent agreement between the simulated and experimental free energy. These results provide new insight into the DNA binding of clinically important antimalarial compounds and may play a role in future development of new antimalarials.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".