Literature DB >> 30130102

Discovering Highly Potent Molecules from an Initial Set of Inactives Using Iterative Screening.

Isidro Cortés-Ciriano1, Nicholas C Firth2,3, Andreas Bender1, Oliver Watson3.   

Abstract

The versatility of similarity searching and quantitative structure-activity relationships to model the activity of compound sets within given bioactivity ranges (i.e., interpolation) is well established. However, their relative performance in the common scenario in early stage drug discovery where lots of inactive data but no active data points are available (i.e., extrapolation from the low-activity to the high-activity range) has not been thoroughly examined yet. To this aim, we have designed an iterative virtual screening strategy which was evaluated on 25 diverse bioactivity data sets from ChEMBL. We benchmark the efficiency of random forest (RF), multiple linear regression, ridge regression, similarity searching, and random selection of compounds to identify a highly active molecule in the test set among a large number of low-potency compounds. We use the number of iterations required to find this active molecule to evaluate the performance of each experimental setup. We show that linear and ridge regression often outperform RF and similarity searching, reducing the number of iterations to find an active compound by a factor of 2 or more. Even simple regression methods seem better able to extrapolate to high-bioactivity ranges than RF, which only provides output values in the range covered by the training set. In addition, examination of the scaffold diversity in the data sets used shows that in some cases similarity searching and RF require two times as many iterations as random selection depending on the chemical space covered in the initial training data. Lastly, we show using bioactivity data for COX-1 and COX-2 that our framework can be extended to multitarget drug discovery, where compounds are selected by concomitantly considering their activity against multiple targets. Overall, this study provides an approach for iterative screening where only inactive data are present in early stages of drug discovery in order to discover highly potent compounds and the best experimental set up in which to do so.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30130102     DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.8b00376

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Inf Model        ISSN: 1549-9596            Impact factor:   4.956


  8 in total

1.  Bioactivity Comparison across Multiple Machine Learning Algorithms Using over 5000 Datasets for Drug Discovery.

Authors:  Thomas R Lane; Daniel H Foil; Eni Minerali; Fabio Urbina; Kimberley M Zorn; Sean Ekins
Journal:  Mol Pharm       Date:  2020-12-16       Impact factor: 4.939

2.  Reply to "Missed opportunities in large scale comparison of QSAR and conformal prediction methods and their applications in drug discovery".

Authors:  Nicolas Bosc; Francis Atkinson; Eloy Félix; Anna Gaulton; Anne Hersey; Andrew R Leach
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 5.514

3.  A decision-theoretic approach to the evaluation of machine learning algorithms in computational drug discovery.

Authors:  Oliver P Watson; Isidro Cortes-Ciriano; Aimee R Taylor; James A Watson
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  Limits of Prediction for Machine Learning in Drug Discovery.

Authors:  Modest von Korff; Thomas Sander
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 5.810

5.  Predicting kinase inhibitors using bioactivity matrix derived informer sets.

Authors:  Huikun Zhang; Spencer S Ericksen; Ching-Pei Lee; Gene E Ananiev; Nathan Wlodarchak; Peng Yu; Julie C Mitchell; Anthony Gitter; Stephen J Wright; F Michael Hoffmann; Scott A Wildman; Michael A Newton
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 4.475

6.  Novel natural and synthetic inhibitors of solute carriers SGLT1 and SGLT2.

Authors:  Paul Oranje; Robin Gouka; Lindsey Burggraaff; Mario Vermeer; Clément Chalet; Guus Duchateau; Pieter van der Pijl; Marian Geldof; Niels de Roo; Fenja Clauwaert; Toon Vanpaeschen; Johan Nicolaï; Tom de Bruyn; Pieter Annaert; Adriaan P IJzerman; Gerard J P van Westen
Journal:  Pharmacol Res Perspect       Date:  2019-07-30

Review 7.  Machine learning models for classification tasks related to drug safety.

Authors:  Anita Rácz; Dávid Bajusz; Ramón Alain Miranda-Quintana; Károly Héberger
Journal:  Mol Divers       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 3.364

8.  Changing the HTS Paradigm: AI-Driven Iterative Screening for Hit Finding.

Authors:  Gabriel H S Dreiman; Magda Bictash; Paul V Fish; Lewis Griffin; Fredrik Svensson
Journal:  SLAS Discov       Date:  2020-08-18       Impact factor: 3.341

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.