Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35165892›Full record

ArticleBiometrics2023

Bayes optimal informer sets for early-stage drug discovery.

Peng Yu, Spencer Ericksen, Anthony Gitter, Michael A Newton

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 54% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Peng YuDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin, Madison.ORCID 0000-0002-3196-3817
Spencer EricksenUniversity of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center.ORCID 0000-0003-4907-1160
Anthony GitterDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin, Madison.ORCID 0000-0002-5324-9833
Michael A NewtonDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin, Madison.ORCID 0000-0001-9038-878X
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USUniversity of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center · US

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Christian Capitini · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
Project 3: Modulation of the head and neck tumor immune microenvironment by targeting the TAM family of receptorsP50CA278595 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Zachary Scott Morris · 2022 to 2026
$12.5M
Project 4: Role of Receptor Tyrosine Kinase AXL in HNSCC Therapy ResistanceP50DE026787 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI HARARI, PAUL M · 2016 to 2020
$10.8M
A Machine Learning Platform for Adaptive Chemical ScreeningR01GM135631 · NIGMS · MORGRIDGE INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH, INC. · PI GITTER, ANTHONY JAMES · 2020 to 2024
$2.1M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NCI NIH HHS P50 CA278595NIDCR NIH HHS P50 DE026787NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM135631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An important experimental design problem in early-stage drug discovery is how to prioritize available compounds for testing when very little is known about the target protein. Informer-based ranking (IBR) methods address the prioritization problem when the compounds have provided bioactivity data on other potentially relevant targets. An IBR method selects an informer set of compounds, and then prioritizes the remaining compounds on the basis of new bioactivity experiments performed with the informer set on the target. We formalize the problem as a two-stage decision problem and introduce the Bayes Optimal Informer SEt (BOISE) method for its solution. BOISE leverages a flexible model of the initial bioactivity data, a relevant loss function, and effective computational schemes to resolve the two-step design problem. We evaluate BOISE and compare it to other IBR strategies in two retrospective studies, one on protein-kinase inhibition and the other on anticancer drug sensitivity. In both empirical settings BOISE exhibits better predictive performance than available methods. It also behaves well with missing data, where methods that use matrix completion show worse predictive performance.

Indexed as

Drug DiscoveryProteinsBayes TheoremRetrospective StudiesProteinsBayes decision ruleDirichlet process mixture modelexperimental designhigh-throughput screeningmatrix completionranking

Identifiers

PMID35165892
PMCPMC9376199
OpenAlexW4213204524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.