ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Computational Method for Quantitative Comparison of Activity Landscapes on the Basis of Image Data.
Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Activity landscape (AL) models are used for visualizing and interpreting structure-activity relationships (SARs) in compound datasets. Therefore, ALs are designed to present chemical similarity and compound potency information in context. Different two- or three-dimensional (2D or 3D) AL representations have been introduced. For SAR analysis, 3D AL models are particularly intuitive. In these models, an interpolated potency surface is added as a third dimension to a 2D projection of chemical space. Accordingly, AL topology can be associated with characteristic SAR features. Going beyond visualization and a qualitative assessment of SARs, it would be very helpful to compare 3D ALs of different datasets in more quantitative terms. However, quantitative AL analysis is still in its infancy. Recently, it has been shown that 3D AL models with pre-defined topologies can be correctly classified using machine learning. Classification was facilitated on the basis of AL image feature representations learned with convolutional neural networks. Therefore, we have further investigated image analysis for quantitative comparison of 3D ALs and devised an approach to determine (dis)similarity relationships for ALs representing different compound datasets. Herein, we report this approach and demonstrate proof-of-principle. The methodology makes it possible to computationally compare 3D ALs and quantify topological differences reflecting varying SAR information content. For SAR exploration in drug design, this adds a quantitative measure of AL (dis)similarity to graphical analysis.
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.