Structure-Guided Design of ISOX-DUAL-Based Degraders Targeting BRD4 and CBP/EP300: A Case of Degrader Collapse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Degraders with dual activity against BRD4 and CBP/EP300 were designed. A structure-guided design approach was taken to assess and test potential exit vectors on the dual BRD4 and CBP/EP300 inhibitor, ISOX-DUAL. Candidate degrader panels revealed that VHL-recruiting moieties could mediate dose-responsive ubiquitination of BRD4. A panel of CRBN-recruiting thalidomide-based degraders was unable to induce ubiquitination or degradation of target proteins. High-resolution protein cocrystal structures revealed an unexpected interaction between the thalidomide moiety and Trp81 on the first bromodomain of BRD4. The inability to form a ternary complex provides a potential rationale for the lack of degrader activity with these compounds, some of which have remarkable affinities close to those of (+)-JQ1, as low as 65 nM in a biochemical assay, vs 1.5 μM for their POI ligand, ISOX-DUAL. Such a "degrader collapse" may represent an under-reported mechanism by which some putative degrader molecules are inactive with respect to target protein degradation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".