MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409147776 · doi:10.1080/07366205.2025.2484094

A drug screening platform for protein expression levels in neurological disorders

2025· article· en· W4409147776 on OpenAlexafffund
Farida Emran, Ibrahim Kays, Chiu‐An Lo, Yueyang Li, Brian E. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueBioTechniques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLysosomal Storage Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchQuébec Consortium for Drug DiscoveryWeston Brain Institute
KeywordsBiologyGeneGene expressionProtein expressionPopulationDrugDrug discoveryComputational biologyCas9Target proteinReporter geneCRISPRMolecular biologyGeneticsBioinformaticsPharmacologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurological and psychiatric diseases and disorders affect more than half of the population. Many of these diseases are caused by the malfunctioning of protein synthesis, where too little or too much production of a protein harms a cell and its functions within the brain. We developed a drug screening platform to identify compounds that target the primary cause of these diseases, namely protein expression amounts. This cellular assay monitors protein expression of a target disease gene along with the protein expression of a control gene using the Protein Quantitation Ratioing (PQR) technique. PQR tracks protein concentration using fluorescence. We used human cells and CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing to insert the Protein Quantitation Reporter into target genes. These cells are used in high-throughput drug screening measuring the fluorescence as the assay. Drug hits can be validated using the same PQR technique or animal models of the disease.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.306 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioTechniquesSame topicLysosomal Storage Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207