ArticleArtificial intelligence in the life sciences2021
An
Article in Artificial intelligence in the life sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine Learning-Driven Discovery of Structurally Related Natural Products as Activators of the Cardiac Calcium Pump SERCA2a.ChemMedChem · 2025Article
- Assessing the Inhibitory Potential of Natural Compounds for Targeting the CrtM Proteins in Methicillin-ResistantCurrent medicinal chemistry · 2025Article
- Chemoinformatics and artificial intelligence colloquium: progress and challenges in developing bioactive compounds.Journal of cheminformatics · 2022Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
The search for novel therapeutic compounds remains an overwhelming task owing to the time-consuming and expensive nature of the drug development process and low success rates. Traditional methodologies that rely on the one drug-one target paradigm have proven insufficient for the treatment of multifactorial diseases, leading to a shift to multitarget approaches. In this emerging paradigm, molecules with off-target and promiscuous interactions may result in preferred therapies. In this study, we developed a general pipeline combining machine learning algorithms and a deep generator network to train a dual inhibitor classifier capable of identifying putative pharmacophoric traits. As a case study, we focused on dual inhibitors targeting DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT) and histone deacetylase 2 (HDAC2), two enzymes that play a central role in epigenetic regulation. We used this approach to identify dual inhibitors from a novel large natural product database in the public domain. We used docking and atomistic simulations as complementary approaches to establish the ligand-interaction profiles between the best hits and DNMT1/HDAC2. By using the combined ligand- and structure-based approaches, we discovered two promising novel scaffolds that can be used to simultaneously target both DNMT1 and HDAC2. We conclude that the flexibility and adaptability of the proposed pipeline has predictive capabilities of similar or derivative methods and is readily applicable to the discovery of small molecules targeting many other therapeutically relevant proteins.
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.