4.6 Article

Accurate and efficient target prediction using a potency-sensitive influence-relevance voter

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHEMINFORMATICS
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13321-015-0110-6

Keywords

Target-prediction; Large-scale; Fingerprints; Molecular potency; Random inactive molecules; Influence-relevance voter

Funding

  1. NSF [IIS-0513376]
  2. NIH [LM010235]
  3. NIH NLM [T15 LM07443]
  4. Google Faculty Research award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: A number of algorithms have been proposed to predict the biological targets of diverse molecules. Some are structure-based, but the most common are ligand-based and use chemical fingerprints and the notion of chemical similarity. These methods tend to be computationally faster than others, making them particularly attractive tools as the amount of available data grows. Results: Using a ChEMBL-derived database covering 490,760 molecule-protein interactions and 3236 protein targets, we conduct a large-scale assessment of the performance of several target-prediction algorithms at predicting drug-target activity. We assess algorithm performance using three validation procedures: standard tenfold cross-validation, tenfold cross-validation in a simulated screen that includes random inactive molecules, and validation on an external test set composed of molecules not present in our database. Conclusions: We present two improvements over current practice. First, using a modified version of the influence-relevance voter (IRV), we show that using molecule potency data can improve target prediction. Second, we demonstrate that random inactive molecules added during training can boost the accuracy of several algorithms in realistic target-prediction experiments. Our potency-sensitive version of the IRV (PS-IRV) obtains the best results on large test sets in most of the experiments. Models and software are publicly accessible through the chemoinformatics portal at http://chemdb.ics.uci.edu/

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available