ArticleSystems and synthetic biology2015
Cheminformatics models based on machine learning approaches for design of USP1/UAF1 abrogators as anticancer agents.
Article in Systems and synthetic biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine Learning Enabled Structure-Based Drug Repurposing Approach to Identify Potential CYP1B1 Inhibitors.ACS omega · 2022Article
- Computational models for the prediction of adverse cardiovascular drug reactions.Journal of translational medicine · 2019Article
- Machine Learning From Molecular Dynamics Trajectories to Predict Caspase-8 Inhibitors Against Alzheimer's Disease.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Article
- Article
- Design of novel amyloid β aggregation inhibitors using QSAR, pharmacophore modeling, molecular docking and ADME prediction.In silico pharmacology · 2018Article
- Integrating network, sequence and functional features using machine learning approaches towards identification of novel Alzheimer genes.BMC genomics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer cells have upregulated DNA repair mechanisms, enabling them survive DNA damage induced during repeated rapid cell divisions and targeted chemotherapeutic treatments. Cancer cell proliferation and survival targeting via inhibition of DNA repair pathways is currently a very promiscuous anti-tumor approach. The deubiquitinating enzyme, USP1 is known to promote DNA repair via complexing with UAF1. The USP1/UAF1 complex is responsible for regulating DNA break repair pathways such as trans-lesion synthesis pathway, Fanconi anemia pathway and homologous recombination. Thus, USP1/UAF1 inhibition poses as an efficient anti-cancer strategy. The recently made available high throughput screen data for anti USP1/UAF1 activity prompted us to compute bioactivity predictive models that could help in screening for potential USP1/UAF1 inhibitors having anti-cancer properties. The current study utilizes publicly available high throughput screen data set of chemical compounds evaluated for their potential USP1/UAF1 inhibitory effect. A machine learning approach was devised for generation of computational models that could predict for potential anti USP1/UAF1 biological activity of novel anticancer compounds. Additional efficacy of active compounds was screened by applying SMARTS filter to eliminate molecules with non-drug like features. The structural fragment analysis was further performed to explore structural properties of the molecules. We demonstrated that modern machine learning approaches could be efficiently employed in building predictive computational models and their predictive performance is statistically accurate. The structure fragment analysis revealed the structures that could play an important role in identification of USP1/UAF1 inhibitors.
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.