Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35468126›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Bioactivity assessment of natural compounds using machine learning models trained on target similarity between drugs.

Vinita Periwal, Stefan Bassler, Sergej Andrejev, Natalia Gabrielli, Kaustubh Raosaheb Patil, Athanasios Typas, Kiran Raosaheb Patil

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Vinita PeriwalEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3583-0413
Stefan BasslerEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0652-9242
Sergej AndrejevEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7875-0261
Natalia GabrielliEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5222-3925
Kaustubh Raosaheb PatilInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-7), Jülich, Germany.
Athanasios TypasEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0797-9018
Kiran Raosaheb PatilEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6166-8640
Forschungszentrum Jülich · DEEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory · DEUniversity of Cambridge · GBHeidelberg University · DE

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00025/11
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural compounds constitute a rich resource of potential small molecule therapeutics. While experimental access to this resource is limited due to its vast diversity and difficulties in systematic purification, computational assessment of structural similarity with known therapeutic molecules offers a scalable approach. Here, we assessed functional similarity between natural compounds and approved drugs by combining multiple chemical similarity metrics and physicochemical properties using a machine-learning approach. We computed pairwise similarities between 1410 drugs for training classification models and used the drugs shared protein targets as class labels. The best performing models were random forest which gave an average area under the ROC of 0.9, Matthews correlation coefficient of 0.35, and F1 score of 0.33, suggesting that it captured the structure-activity relation well. The models were then used to predict protein targets of circa 11k natural compounds by comparing them with the drugs. This revealed therapeutic potential of several natural compounds, including those with support from previously published sources as well as those hitherto unexplored. We experimentally validated one of the predicted pair's activities, viz., Cox-1 inhibition by 5-methoxysalicylic acid, a molecule commonly found in tea, herbs and spices. In contrast, another natural compound, 4-isopropylbenzoic acid, with the highest similarity score when considering most weighted similarity metric but not picked by our models, did not inhibit Cox-1. Our results demonstrate the utility of a machine-learning approach combining multiple chemical features for uncovering protein binding potential of natural compounds.

Indexed as

Machine LearningProteinsProtein BindingProteins

Identifiers

PMID35468126
PMCPMC9071136
OpenAlexW4224867167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.