ArticlePloS one2026
Interpretable candidate drug prioritization and explanation framework across-medical knowledge graphs based on graph embedding models: A case study of type 2 diabetes.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAddressing the challenges in elucidating the mechanisms of complex diseases such as Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), this study aims to construct a domain-specific cross-medicine knowledge graph (CMKG) and develop a unified path scoring framework that couples graph embeddings with rule-based reasoning, enabling high-precision, interpretable prioritization and explanation of potential drug candidates.
methodsFirst, multi-source biomedical data from Hetionet, SymMap, TCMBank, STRING, and TTD were integrated. Using Jaccard and overlap-based fusion strategies, entity alignment and relation consolidation were performed to construct a deep CMKG bridged by genes. Second, four graph embedding models (TransE, DistMult, ComplEx, and RotatE) were introduced for link prediction and evaluated using MRR and Hits@K. Finally, to overcome the interpretability limitations of black-box predictions, AnyBURL rule learning was combined with depth-first search (DFS). We innovatively introduced an Ingredient Specificity Index (ISI) and a hybrid path confidence calibration mechanism, constructing a unified path scoring system incorporating length decay, node/relation weights, and experimental evidence bonuses to screen the most critical mechanistic paths.
resultsThe constructed CMKG contains 15 entity types (245,235 entities) and 52 relation types (7,155,373 triples), covering 709 core T2DM genes. Link prediction stability tests across multiple random seeds showed that the ComplEx model consistently performed best in handling complex multi-mapping relations (MRR = 0.213 ± 0.004, Hits@10 = 0.418 ± 0.003). Consequently, the fully converged ComplEx model (Peak Hits@10 = 0.48) was utilized for comprehensive prediction. Retaining the top 100 predictions, Abelmoschus manihot and Topiramate ranked highest among TCM herbs and modern medicine compounds, respectively. Path analysis based on the scoring system revealed deep multi-target mechanisms, including insulin signaling sensitization, inflammatory regulation, and chromatin/cell-cycle intervention.
conclusionThe proposed gene-bridged graph embedding and unified path scoring framework successfully translates probabilistic predictions into biologically traceable semantic explanations. Rigorous ablation and parameter sensitivity experiments confirm that the framework achieves a robust balance between knowledge coverage and explanatory specificity, providing a transparent, robust, and scalable methodological foundation for candidate drug prioritization in complex diseases.
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.