Literature DB >> 32073844

Consensus versus Individual QSARs in Classification: Comparison on a Large-Scale Case Study.

Cecile Valsecchi1, Francesca Grisoni2, Viviana Consonni1, Davide Ballabio1.   

Abstract

Consensus strategies have been widely applied in many different scientific fields, based on the assumption that the fusion of several sources of information increases the outcome reliability. Despite the widespread application of consensus approaches, their advantages in quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) modeling have not been thoroughly evaluated, mainly due to the lack of appropriate large-scale data sets. In this study, we evaluated the advantages and drawbacks of consensus approaches compared to single classification QSAR models. To this end, we used a data set of three properties (androgen receptor binding, agonism, and antagonism) for approximately 4000 molecules with predictions performed by more than 20 QSAR models, made available in a large-scale collaborative project. The individual QSAR models were compared with two consensus approaches, majority voting and the Bayes consensus with discrete probability distributions, in both protective and nonprotective forms. Consensus strategies proved to be more accurate and to better cover the analyzed chemical space than individual QSARs on average, thus motivating their widespread application for property prediction. Scripts and data to reproduce the results of this study are available for download.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32073844      PMCID: PMC7997107          DOI: 10.1021/acs.jcim.9b01057

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


  33 in total

1.  2D QSAR consensus prediction for high-throughput virtual screening. An application to COX-2 inhibition modeling and screening of the NCI database.

Authors:  Nicolas Baurin; Jean-Christophe Mozziconacci; Eric Arnoult; Philippe Chavatte; Christophe Marot; Luc Morin-Allory
Journal:  J Chem Inf Comput Sci       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb

2.  Extended-connectivity fingerprints.

Authors:  David Rogers; Mathew Hahn
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 4.956

Review 3.  Integrated Testing Strategy (ITS) - Opportunities to better use existing data and guide future testing in toxicology.

Authors:  Joanna Jaworska; Sebastian Hoffmann
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 6.043

4.  Predictive models in ecotoxicology: Bridging the gap between scientific progress and regulatory applicability-Remarks and research needs.

Authors:  Marco Vighi; Alpar Barsi; Andreas Focks; Francesca Grisoni
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 2.992

5.  Quantitative structure-activity relationship models for ready biodegradability of chemicals.

Authors:  Kamel Mansouri; Tine Ringsted; Davide Ballabio; Roberto Todeschini; Viviana Consonni
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 4.956

6.  A stochastic regression approach to analyzing thermodynamic uncertainty in chemical speciation modeling.

Authors:  Christopher L Weber; Jeanne M Vanbriesen; Mitchell S Small
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2006-06-15       Impact factor: 9.028

7.  Consensus QSAR modelling of SIRT1 activators using simplex representation of molecular structure.

Authors:  S Chauhan; A Kumar
Journal:  SAR QSAR Environ Res       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 3.000

8.  Machine Learning Consensus To Predict the Binding to the Androgen Receptor within the CoMPARA Project.

Authors:  Francesca Grisoni; Viviana Consonni; Davide Ballabio
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 4.956

9.  CERAPP: Collaborative Estrogen Receptor Activity Prediction Project.

Authors:  Kamel Mansouri; Ahmed Abdelaziz; Aleksandra Rybacka; Alessandra Roncaglioni; Alexander Tropsha; Alexandre Varnek; Alexey Zakharov; Andrew Worth; Ann M Richard; Christopher M Grulke; Daniela Trisciuzzi; Denis Fourches; Dragos Horvath; Emilio Benfenati; Eugene Muratov; Eva Bay Wedebye; Francesca Grisoni; Giuseppe F Mangiatordi; Giuseppina M Incisivo; Huixiao Hong; Hui W Ng; Igor V Tetko; Ilya Balabin; Jayaram Kancherla; Jie Shen; Julien Burton; Marc Nicklaus; Matteo Cassotti; Nikolai G Nikolov; Orazio Nicolotti; Patrik L Andersson; Qingda Zang; Regina Politi; Richard D Beger; Roberto Todeschini; Ruili Huang; Sherif Farag; Sine A Rosenberg; Svetoslav Slavov; Xin Hu; Richard S Judson
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Comparison of different approaches to define the applicability domain of QSAR models.

Authors:  Faizan Sahigara; Kamel Mansouri; Davide Ballabio; Andrea Mauri; Viviana Consonni; Roberto Todeschini
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2012-04-25       Impact factor: 4.411

View more
  3 in total

1.  Incorporating human exposure information in a weight of evidence approach to inform design of repeated dose animal studies.

Authors:  Kelly Lowe; Jeffrey Dawson; Katherine Phillips; Jeffrey Minucci; John F Wambaugh; Hua Qian; Tharacad Ramanarayanan; Peter Egeghy; Brandall Ingle; Rachel Brunner; Elizabeth Mendez; Michelle Embry; Yu-Mei Tan
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2021-10-29       Impact factor: 3.271

2.  Multi-Strategy Assessment of Different Uses of QSAR under REACH Analysis of Alternatives to Advance Information Transparency.

Authors:  Kazue Chinen; Timothy Malloy
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 3.390

3.  In silico prediction of chemical-induced hematotoxicity with machine learning and deep learning methods.

Authors:  Yuqing Hua; Yinping Shi; Xueyan Cui; Xiao Li
Journal:  Mol Divers       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 2.943

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.