ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2013
Generation and application of drug indication inference models using typed network motif comparison analysis.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Network analysis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA): a new horizon for the understanding of disease pathogenesis and therapeutic target identification.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2016Review
- Identification of breast cancer patients based on human signaling network motifs.Scientific reports · 2013Article
- A CTD-Pfizer collaboration: manual curation of 88,000 scientific articles text mined for drug-disease and drug-phenotype interactions.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs the amount of publicly available biomedical data increases, discovering hidden knowledge from biomedical data (i.e., Undiscovered Public Knowledge (UPK) proposed by Swanson) became an important research topic in the biological literature mining field. Drug indication inference, or drug repositioning, is one of famous UPK tasks, which infers alternative indications for approved drugs. Many previous studies tried to find novel candidate indications of existing drugs, but these works have following limitations: 1) models are not fully automated which required manual modulations to desired tasks, 2) are not able to cover various biomedical entities, and 3) have inference limitations that those works could infer only pre-defined cases using limited patterns. To overcome these problems, we suggest a new drug indication inference model.
methodsIn this paper, we adopted the Typed Network Motif Comparison Algorithm (TNMCA) to infer novel drug indications using topology of given network. Typed Network Motifs (TNM) are network motifs, which store types of data, instead of values of data. TNMCA is a powerful inference algorithm for multi-level biomedical interaction data as TNMs depend on the different types of entities and relations. We utilized a new normalized scoring function as well as network exclusion to improve the inference results. To validate our method, we applied TNMCA to a public database, Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD).
resultsThe results show that enhanced TNMCA was able to infer meaningful indications with high performance (AUC = 0.801, 0.829) compared to the ABC model (AUC = 0.7050) and previous TNMCA model (AUC = 0.5679, 0.7469). The literature analysis also shows that TNMCA inferred meaningful results.
conclusionsWe proposed and enhanced a novel drug indication inference model by incorporating topological patterns of given network. By utilizing inference models from the topological patterns, we were able to improve inference power in drug indication inferences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.