Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40079263›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2025

Scaling up drug combination surface prediction.

Riikka Huusari, Tianduanyi Wang, Sandor Szedmak, Diogo Dias, Tero Aittokallio, Juho Rousu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Riikka HuusariDepartment of Computer Science, Aalto University, Otakaari 1B, FI-00076 Espoo, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-7821-0313
Tianduanyi WangDepartment of Computer Science, Aalto University, Otakaari 1B, FI-00076 Espoo, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-0642-7235
Sandor SzedmakDepartment of Computer Science, Aalto University, Otakaari 1B, FI-00076 Espoo, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-1469-2215
Diogo DiasInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Tukholmankatu 8, FI-00270 Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0009-0006-7806-8277
Tero AittokallioInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Tukholmankatu 8, FI-00270 Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-0886-9769
Juho RousuDepartment of Computer Science, Aalto University, Otakaari 1B, FI-00076 Espoo, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-0705-4314

Funding

Academy of Finland 334790Cancer Society of Finland, and the Sigrid Jusélius FoundationGlobal Programme by Finnish Ministry of Education and CultureNorwegian Cancer Society 216104Norwegian Health Authority South-East 2020026
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug combinations are required to treat advanced cancers and other complex diseases. Compared with monotherapy, combination treatments can enhance efficacy and reduce toxicity by lowering the doses of single drugs-and there especially synergistic combinations are of interest. Since drug combination screening experiments are costly and time-consuming, reliable machine learning models are needed for prioritizing potential combinations for further studies. Most of the current machine learning models are based on scalar-valued approaches, which predict individual response values or synergy scores for drug combinations. We take a functional output prediction approach, in which full, continuous dose-response combination surfaces are predicted for each drug combination on the cell lines. We investigate the predictive power of the recently proposed comboKR method, which is based on a powerful input-output kernel regression technique and functional modeling of the response surface. In this work, we develop a scaled-up formulation of the comboKR, which also implements improved modeling choices: we (1) incorporate new modeling choices for the output drug combination response surfaces to the comboKR framework, and (2) propose a projected gradient descent method to solve the challenging pre-image problem that is traditionally solved with simple candidate set approaches. We provide thorough experimental analysis of comboKR 2.0 with three real-word datasets within various challenging experimental settings, including cases where drugs or cell lines have not been encountered in the training data. Our comparison with synergy score prediction methods further highlights the relevance of dose-response prediction approaches, instead of relying on simple scoring methods.

Indexed as

Machine LearningAlgorithmsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug CombinationsDrug SynergismHumansNeoplasmsDrug Combinationsdrug combination predictiondrug interaction surfaceskernel methodsstructured output prediction

Identifiers

PMID40079263
PMCPMC11904408

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.