MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411655148 · doi:10.3390/ijms26136084

Human Serum Albumin Affinity for Putrescine Using ITC and STD-NMR

2025· article· en· W4411655148 on OpenAlexafffund
Vida Dehghan Niestanak, Ryan T. McKay, Marcello Tonelli, Larry D. Unsworth

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Interaction Studies and Fluorescence Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsPutrescineIsothermal titration calorimetryHuman serum albuminChemistryAlbuminBiophysicsSerum albuminPlasma protein bindingBiochemistryBiologyEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the binding interactions between protein-bound uremic toxins (PBUTs) and human serum albumin (HSA) is critical for advancing treatments for chronic kidney disease (CKD). While previous studies have suggested that putrescine, a diamine PBUT, exhibits moderate binding affinity to HSA, this study provides evidence of the contrary. Using isothermal titration calorimetry and saturation transfer difference nuclear magnetic resonance , we demonstrate that putrescine's interaction with HSA is weak, non-specific, and thermodynamically negligible in the range of conditions studied. Unlike earlier studies relying on spectroscopy techniques such as UV-visible absorption and fluorescence, which may overestimate binding strength, the results presented here highlight the limitations of indirect methodologies and underscore the importance of more sensitive approaches for accurate energy characterization. Our findings suggest that putrescine only weakly interacts non-specifically with HSA and may bind more preferentially to other plasma proteins, contributing to its accumulation in CKD patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicProtein Interaction Studies and Fluorescence AnalysisFrench-language works237,207