G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) pharmacogenomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The field of pharmacogenetics, the investigation of the influence of one or more sequence variants on drug response phenotypes, is a special case of pharmacogenomics, a discipline that takes a genome-wide approach. Massively parallel, next generation sequencing (NGS), has allowed pharmacogenetics to be subsumed by pharmacogenomics with respect to the identification of variants associated with responders and non-responders, optimal drug response, and adverse drug reactions. A plethora of rare and common naturally-occurring GPCR variants must be considered in the context of signals from across the genome. Many fundamentals of pharmacogenetics were established for G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) genes because they are primary targets for a large number of therapeutic drugs. Functional studies, demonstrating likely-pathogenic and pathogenic GPCR variants, have been integral to establishing models used for in silico analysis. Variants in GPCR genes include both coding and non-coding single nucleotide variants and insertion or deletions (indels) that affect cell surface expression (trafficking, dimerization, and desensitization/downregulation), ligand binding and G protein coupling, and variants that result in alternate splicing encoding isoforms/variable expression. As the breadth of data on the GPCR genome increases, we may expect an increase in the use of drug labels that note variants that significantly impact the clinical use of GPCR-targeting agents. We discuss the implications of GPCR pharmacogenomic data derived from the genomes available from individuals who have been well-phenotyped for receptor structure and function and receptor-ligand interactions, and the potential benefits to patients of optimized drug selection. Examples discussed include the renin-angiotensin system in SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection, the probable role of chemokine receptors in the cytokine storm, and potential protease activating receptor (PAR) interventions. Resources dedicated to GPCRs, including publicly available computational tools, are also discussed.
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".