Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37268960›Full record

ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2023

Merging bioactivity predictions from cell morphology and chemical fingerprint models using similarity to training data.

Srijit Seal, Hongbin Yang, Maria-Anna Trapotsi, Satvik Singh, Jordi Carreras-Puigvert, Ola Spjuth, Andreas Bender

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Improved Detection of Drug-Induced Liver Injury by Integrating PredictedbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Srijit SealYusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Hongbin YangYusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Maria-Anna TrapotsiYusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Satvik SinghDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics (DAMTP), University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Jordi Carreras-PuigvertDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences and Science for Life Laboratory, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Ola SpjuthDepartment of Pharmaceutical Biosciences and Science for Life Laboratory, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. ola.spjuth@farmbio.uu.se.
Andreas BenderYusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. ab454@cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Cambridge Centre for Data Driven Discovery and Accelerate Programme for Scientific Discovery Theoretical Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives on Biological Understanding in the Age of Artificial IntelligenceFORMAS 2018-00924Swedish Research Council 2020-03731
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The applicability domain of machine learning models trained on structural fingerprints for the prediction of biological endpoints is often limited by the lack of diversity of chemical space of the training data. In this work, we developed similarity-based merger models which combined the outputs of individual models trained on cell morphology (based on Cell Painting) and chemical structure (based on chemical fingerprints) and the structural and morphological similarities of the compounds in the test dataset to compounds in the training dataset. We applied these similarity-based merger models using logistic regression models on the predictions and similarities as features and predicted assay hit calls of 177 assays from ChEMBL, PubChem and the Broad Institute (where the required Cell Painting annotations were available). We found that the similarity-based merger models outperformed other models with an additional 20% assays (79 out of 177 assays) with an AUC > 0.70 compared with 65 out of 177 assays using structural models and 50 out of 177 assays using Cell Painting models. Our results demonstrated that similarity-based merger models combining structure and cell morphology models can more accurately predict a wide range of biological assay outcomes and further expanded the applicability domain by better extrapolating to new structural and morphology spaces.

Indexed as

Applicability domainBioactivityCell PaintingMachine learningStructureToxicity

Identifiers

PMID37268960
PMCPMC10236827

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.