MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Dose–Response Evaluation of Novel RORγt Inhibitors by Low-Throughput TR-FRET and Phenotypic Assays

2025· other· W7094949938 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Language
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoactivatorRetinoic acidFluorescence anisotropyTransplantationPhenotypeReceptorKidney transplantationAntibodyFluorescence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

🧾 AbstractBackground: Transplantation is considered the treatment of choice for end stage kidney disease, as it decreases mortality, morbidity and health-care costs compared to dialysis. However, more than 20% of kidney transplantation candidates are highly sensitized as defined by a high calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA > 80%). These patients can develop an antibody mediated rejection (AMR) and less than 10% of them can get a successful transplantation. Growing evidence suggests the involvement of immunosuppressant resistant Th17 and Tc17 cells in orchestrating the rejection in highly sensitized patients and other cases of AMR. Differentiation of naïve T-cell into Th17 is regulated through the expression of retinoic acid receptor related orphan receptor gamma t (RORγt) nuclear receptor. Using rational drug design and virtual screening, we discovered a group of compounds that can inhibit RORγt and can decrease de novo generation of Th17 and Tc17 cells in PBMCs derived from highly sensitized patients. Objective: to determine the binding affinity and dose-response of novel modulators of RORγt using time resolved fluorescence energy transfer binding assay. Methods: we evaluated the binding of 23 compounds by time resolved fluorescence energy transfer of RORγt-LBD-biotinylated coactivator peptide complex. A known inhibitor of RORγt, GSK2981278, was used as a reference. Ten 2.3-fold dilutions per compound were tested and IC50 was determined for all the compounds. Additionally, we tested the effect of compounds on Th17 and Treg polarization phenotypic assays. Results: all the compounds tested inhibited RORγt-LBD coactivator binding at picomolar to nanomolar concentrations (IC50 < 100 nM). In Th17 polarization assay, two compounds were tested, and both showed a nanomolar inhibition of IL17A when used at 2, 15 nM concentration and reduced the percentage of Th17 cells by 20-30% (p < 0.05). Conclusion: we identified potent inhibitors of RORγt and can efficiently attenuate Th17 polarization. They can be used in-vivo to block T cells differentiation to Th17 and Tc17 and treat conditions associated with increased IL17 production.📁 File Description The initial submission published in the conference proceedings and the final author-reprint, posted online on 22 October 2025.📍 Conference and MetadataPresented at: Vth International Drug Discovery and Development Forum 2019 Presentation Date: October 2, 2019 Location: Montreal, QC, Canada Abstract Category: Mechanism of Drug Action Presentation Type: Oral and Poster Authors: Ahmed Fouda, Sarita Negi, Steven Paraskevas, Jean Tchervenkov Affiliation: Department of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada📚 Full CitationFouda, A.; Negi, S.; Paraskevas, S.; Tchervenkov, J. Dose–Response Evaluation of Novel RORγt Inhibitors by Low-Throughput TR-FRET and Phenotypic Assays. In Proc. Int. Drug Discov. Dev. Forum 2019; 5, 33–34 (Abstr. 23). Vth International Drug Discovery and Development Forum, Montreal, QC, Canada, October 2, 2019. DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.30421933 © 2019, Ahmed Fouda.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis→French-language works237,207→