Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35649342›Full record

ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2022

BETA: a comprehensive benchmark for computational drug-target prediction.

Nansu Zong, Ning Li, Andrew Wen, Victoria Ngo, Yue Yu, Ming Huang, Shaika Chowdhury, Chao Jiang, Sunyang Fu, Richard Weinshilboum and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Target identification and assessment in the era of AI.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Contrastive learning in protein language space predicts interactions between drugs and protein targets.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

13 authors.

Nansu ZongDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.ORCID 0000-0003-0066-9524
Ning LiCenter for Structure Biology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, MD.
Andrew WenDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Victoria NgoBetty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California Davis Health, Sacramento, CA.
Yue YuDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Ming HuangDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Shaika ChowdhuryDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Chao JiangDepartment of Computer Science and Software Engineering, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.
Sunyang FuDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Richard WeinshilboumDepartment of Molecular Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Guoqian JiangDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Lawrence HunterDepartment of Pharmacology, University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, CO.
Hongfang LiuDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Funding

BOND: Benchmarking based on heterogeneous biOmedical Network and Deep learning novel drug-target associationsR00GM135488 · NIGMS · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI ZONG, NANSU · 2021 to 2023
$747k
BOND: Benchmarking based on heterogeneous biOmedical Network and Deep learning novel drug-target associationsK99GM135488 · NIGMS · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI ZONG, NANSU · 2020 to 2021
$108k
NIGMS NIH HHS K99 GM135488NIGMS NIH HHS R00 GM135488
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Internal validation is the most popular evaluation strategy used for drug-target predictive models. The simple random shuffling in the cross-validation, however, is not always ideal to handle large, diverse and copious datasets as it could potentially introduce bias. Hence, these predictive models cannot be comprehensively evaluated to provide insight into their general performance on a variety of use-cases (e.g. permutations of different levels of connectiveness and categories in drug and target space, as well as validations based on different data sources). In this work, we introduce a benchmark, BETA, that aims to address this gap by (i) providing an extensive multipartite network consisting of 0.97 million biomedical concepts and 8.5 million associations, in addition to 62 million drug-drug and protein-protein similarities and (ii) presenting evaluation strategies that reflect seven cases (i.e. general, screening with different connectivity, target and drug screening based on categories, searching for specific drugs and targets and drug repurposing for specific diseases), a total of seven Tests (consisting of 344 Tasks in total) across multiple sampling and validation strategies. Six state-of-the-art methods covering two broad input data types (chemical structure- and gene sequence-based and network-based) were tested across all the developed Tasks. The best-worst performing cases have been analyzed to demonstrate the ability of the proposed benchmark to identify limitations of the tested methods for running over the benchmark tasks. The results highlight BETA as a benchmark in the selection of computational strategies for drug repurposing and target discovery.

Indexed as

Drug DevelopmentAlgorithmsDrug Evaluation, PreclinicalDrug RepositioningProteinsProteinscomputational cenchmarkcomputational drug developmentdeep learningdrug target prediction

Identifiers

PMID35649342
PMCPMC9294420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.