ArticleNPJ systems biology and applications2023
Asking the right questions for mutagenicity prediction from BioMedical text.
Article in NPJ systems biology and applications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Potential for Computational Genotoxicity: A Report on Symposium 3 of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Japanese Environmental Mutagen and Genome Society (JEMS), 2024.Genes and environment : the official journal of the Japanese Environmental Mutagen Society · 2026Article
- Comparative in silico analysis of CNS-active molecules targeting the blood-brain barrier choline transporter for Alzheimer's disease therapy.In silico pharmacology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Assessing the mutagenicity of chemicals is an essential task in the drug development process. Usually, databases and other structured sources for AMES mutagenicity exist, which have been carefully and laboriously curated from scientific publications. As knowledge accumulates over time, updating these databases is always an overhead and impractical. In this paper, we first propose the problem of predicting the mutagenicity of chemicals from textual information in scientific publications. More simply, given a chemical and evidence in the natural language form from publications where the mutagenicity of the chemical is described, the goal of the model/algorithm is to predict if it is potentially mutagenic or not. For this, we first construct a golden standard data set and then propose MutaPredBERT, a prediction model fine-tuned on BioLinkBERT based on a question-answering formulation of the problem. We leverage transfer learning and use the help of large transformer-based models to achieve a Macro F1 score of >0.88 even with relatively small data for fine-tuning. Our work establishes the utility of large language models for the construction of structured sources of knowledge bases directly from scientific publications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.