Literature DB >> 27642585

Predictive Modeling of Estrogen Receptor Binding Agents Using Advanced Cheminformatics Tools and Massive Public Data.

Kathryn Ribay1, Marlene T Kim2, Wenyi Wang3, Daniel Pinolini3, Hao Zhu2.   

Abstract

Estrogen receptors (ERα) are a critical target for drug design as well as a potential source of toxicity when activated unintentionally. Thus, evaluating potential ERα binding agents is critical in both drug discovery and chemical toxicity areas. Using computational tools, e.g., Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models, can predict potential ERα binding agents before chemical synthesis. The purpose of this project was to develop enhanced predictive models of ERα binding agents by utilizing advanced cheminformatics tools that can integrate publicly available bioassay data. The initial ERα binding agent data set, consisting of 446 binders and 8307 non-binders, was obtained from the Tox21 Challenge project organized by the NIH Chemical Genomics Center (NCGC). After removing the duplicates and inorganic compounds, this data set was used to create a training set (259 binders and 259 non-binders). This training set was used to develop QSAR models using chemical descriptors. The resulting models were then used to predict the binding activity of 264 external compounds, which were available to us after the models were developed. The cross-validation results of training set [Correct Classification Rate (CCR) = 0.72] were much higher than the external predictivity of the unknown compounds (CCR = 0.59). To improve the conventional QSAR models, all compounds in the training set were used to search PubChem and generate a profile of their biological responses across thousands of bioassays. The most important bioassays were prioritized to generate a similarity index that was used to calculate the biosimilarity score between each two compounds. The nearest neighbors for each compound within the set were then identified and its ERα binding potential was predicted by its nearest neighbors in the training set. The hybrid model performance (CCR = 0.94 for cross validation; CCR = 0.68 for external prediction) showed significant improvement over the original QSAR models, particularly for the activity cliffs that induce prediction errors. The results of this study indicate that the response profile of chemicals from public data provides useful information for modeling and evaluation purposes. The public big data resources should be considered along with chemical structure information when predicting new compounds, such as unknown ERα binding agents.

Entities:  

Keywords:  QSAR modeling; bioassay profiling; biosimilarity; endocrine disrupting chemicals; estrogen receptor α

Year:  2016        PMID: 27642585      PMCID: PMC5023020          DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2016.00012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Environ Sci        ISSN: 2296-665X


  40 in total

1.  Novel variable selection quantitative structure--property relationship approach based on the k-nearest-neighbor principle

Authors: 
Journal:  J Chem Inf Comput Sci       Date:  2000-01

2.  Rational selection of training and test sets for the development of validated QSAR models.

Authors:  Alexander Golbraikh; Min Shen; Zhiyan Xiao; Yun-De Xiao; Kuo-Hsiung Lee; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2003 Feb-Apr       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  On outliers and activity cliffs--why QSAR often disappoints.

Authors:  Gerald M Maggiora
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.956

4.  QSAR and mechanistic interpretation of estrogen receptor binding.

Authors:  R Serafimova; M Todorov; D Nedelcheva; T Pavlov; Y Akahori; M Nakai; O Mekenyan
Journal:  SAR QSAR Environ Res       Date:  2007 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.000

5.  Combinatorial QSAR modeling of chemical toxicants tested against Tetrahymena pyriformis.

Authors:  Hao Zhu; Alexander Tropsha; Denis Fourches; Alexandre Varnek; Ester Papa; Paola Gramatica; Tomas Oberg; Phuong Dao; Artem Cherkasov; Igor V Tetko
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2008-03-01       Impact factor: 4.956

6.  The trouble with QSAR (or how I learned to stop worrying and embrace fallacy).

Authors:  Stephen R Johnson
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2007-12-28       Impact factor: 4.956

Review 7.  Estrogen receptors and endocrine diseases: lessons from estrogen receptor knockout mice.

Authors:  S O Mueller; K S Korach
Journal:  Curr Opin Pharmacol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.547

8.  Predicting chemical ocular toxicity using a combinatorial QSAR approach.

Authors:  Renee Solimeo; Jun Zhang; Marlene Kim; Alexander Sedykh; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 3.739

9.  Pharmacophore and QSAR modeling of estrogen receptor beta ligands and subsequent validation and in silico search for new hits.

Authors:  Mutasem O Taha; Mai Tarairah; Hiba Zalloum; Ghassan Abu-Sheikha
Journal:  J Mol Graph Model       Date:  2009-09-30       Impact factor: 2.518

10.  Critical evaluation of human oral bioavailability for pharmaceutical drugs by using various cheminformatics approaches.

Authors:  Marlene T Kim; Alexander Sedykh; Suman K Chakravarti; Roustem D Saiakhov; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 4.200

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Advancing computer-aided drug discovery (CADD) by big data and data-driven machine learning modeling.

Authors:  Linlin Zhao; Heather L Ciallella; Lauren M Aleksunes; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 7.851

2.  CIIPro: a new read-across portal to fill data gaps using public large-scale chemical and biological data.

Authors:  Daniel P Russo; Marlene T Kim; Wenyi Wang; Daniel Pinolini; Sunil Shende; Judy Strickland; Thomas Hartung; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 3.  Big-data and machine learning to revamp computational toxicology and its use in risk assessment.

Authors:  Thomas Luechtefeld; Craig Rowlands; Thomas Hartung
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 3.524

Review 4.  Big Data and Artificial Intelligence Modeling for Drug Discovery.

Authors:  Hao Zhu
Journal:  Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 13.820

5.  Comparing Multiple Machine Learning Algorithms and Metrics for Estrogen Receptor Binding Prediction.

Authors:  Daniel P Russo; Kimberley M Zorn; Alex M Clark; Hao Zhu; Sean Ekins
Journal:  Mol Pharm       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 4.939

6.  Predicting Prenatal Developmental Toxicity Based On the Combination of Chemical Structures and Biological Data.

Authors:  Heather L Ciallella; Daniel P Russo; Swati Sharma; Yafan Li; Eddie Sloter; Len Sweet; Heng Huang; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 11.357

7.  Towards accurate high-throughput ligand affinity prediction by exploiting structural ensembles, docking metrics and ligand similarity.

Authors:  Melanie Schneider; Jean-Luc Pons; William Bourguet; Gilles Labesse
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 6.937

8.  DeepSnap-Deep Learning Approach Predicts Progesterone Receptor Antagonist Activity With High Performance.

Authors:  Yasunari Matsuzaka; Yoshihiro Uesawa
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-01-22

9.  Revealing Adverse Outcome Pathways from Public High-Throughput Screening Data to Evaluate New Toxicants by a Knowledge-Based Deep Neural Network Approach.

Authors:  Heather L Ciallella; Daniel P Russo; Lauren M Aleksunes; Fabian A Grimm; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2021-07-25       Impact factor: 11.357

Review 10.  Computer-Aided Ligand Discovery for Estrogen Receptor Alpha.

Authors:  Divya Bafna; Fuqiang Ban; Paul S Rennie; Kriti Singh; Artem Cherkasov
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-06-12       Impact factor: 5.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.