The impact of secondary site interactions on the binding specificity of bitopic dopamine D2/D3 receptor ligands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dysfunction of dopamine receptors and interruption of normal dopaminergic signaling have been linked to severe neuropsychiatric diseases such as schizophrenia, Parkinson's disease and depression. Although these receptors are among the most drug-targeted families of GPCRs, designing compounds with subtype-specific pharmacological profile remains challenging due to the structural similarities among the subtypes of the family. Considering the structural moieties of cariprazine, a prototypic drug with D 3 receptor (D 3 R) preference, we report a library of bitopic analogues to explore how the orthosteric and secondary binding motifs, coupled with different linkers, affect D 2 R/D 3 R selectivity and activity. Compounds with promising dopamine receptor selectivities and binding affinities were further characterized on a GPCR panel and in functional assays. Our efforts resulted in an advanced lead compound ( 20b ) with improved D 3 R and 5-HT 2A R, as well as decreased D 2 R and 5-HT 1A R potencies (EC 50 ) compared to cariprazine. The cleaner receptor profile of this compound retained activities for the most important antidepressant mechanisms that were confirmed by reducing the depression-like behavior in mice.
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 | 0.002 | 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".