3.8 Article

ADME prediction with KNIME: A retrospective contribution to the second Solubility Challenge

期刊

ADMET AND DMPK
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

IAPC PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.5599/admet.979

关键词

Second Solubility Challenge; Quantitative Structure-Property Relationship (QSPR); KNIME; aqueous solubility; ADME; machine learning; Random Forest; supervised recursive variable selection

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Computational models based on molecular structure are effective in predicting drug solubility. Despite inconsistencies in the training set, the model performed well on the molecules from the second Solubility Challenge, and a KNIME automated workflow was provided for predicting aqueous solubility of new drug candidates.
Computational models for predicting aqueous solubility from the molecular structure represent a promising strategy from the perspective of drug design and discovery. Since the first Solubility Challenge, these initiatives have marked the state-of-art of the modelling algorithms used to predict drug solubility. In this regard, the quality of the input experimental data and its influence on model performance has been frequently discussed. In our previous study, we developed a computational model for aqueous solubility based on recursive random forest approaches. The aim of the current commentary is to analyse the performance of this already trained predictive model on the molecules of the second Solubility Challenge. Even when our training set has inconsistencies related to the pH, solid form and temperature conditions of the solubility measurements, the model was able to predict the two sets from the second Solubility Challenge with statistics comparable to those of the top ranked models. Finally, we provided a KNIME automated workflow to predict aqueous solubility of new drug candidates, during the early stages of drug discovery and development, for ensuring the applicability and reproducibility of our model. (C) 2021 by the authors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据