ArticleScientific reports2020
A comparative chemogenic analysis for predicting Drug-Target Pair via Machine Learning Approaches.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reposition of lenalidomide as a radiation protector based on LINCS gene expression signatures and its preclinical validation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Computational Strategies in Drug Discovery: Leveraging Subtractive Genomic Analysis for Target Identification.Current pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2025Review
- DEDTI versus IEDTI: efficient and predictive models of drug-target interactions.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Drug repurposing and prediction of multiple interaction types via graph embedding.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Novel drug-target interactions via link prediction and network embedding.BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Incorporating Machine Learning into Established Bioinformatics Frameworks.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- An Integrated Deep Learning and Molecular Dynamics Simulation-Based Screening Pipeline Identifies Inhibitors of a New Cancer Drug Target TIPE2.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A computational technique for predicting the DTIs has now turned out to be an indispensable job during the process of drug finding. It tapers the exploration room for interactions by propounding possible interaction contenders for authentication through experiments of wet-lab which are known for their expensiveness and time consumption. Chemogenomics, an emerging research area focused on the systematic examination of the biological impact of a broad series of minute molecular-weighting ligands on a broad raiment of macromolecular target spots. Additionally, with the advancement in time, the complexity of the algorithms is increasing which may result in the entry of big data technologies like Spark in this field soon. In the presented work, we intend to offer an inclusive idea and realistic evaluation of the computational Drug Target Interaction projection approaches, to perform as a guide and reference for researchers who are carrying out work in a similar direction. Precisely, we first explain the data utilized in computational Drug Target Interaction prediction attempts like this. We then sort and explain the best and most modern techniques for the prediction of DTIs. Then, a realistic assessment is executed to show the projection performance of several illustrative approaches in various situations. Ultimately, we underline possible opportunities for additional improvement of Drug Target Interaction projection enactment and also linked study objectives.
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.