ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2023
Exploring QSAR models for activity-cliff prediction.
Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- How effective are contrastive learning-based approaches for activity-cliff prediction?bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A survey of transformer and LLM-based architectures, workflows, and systems in drug discovery.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2026Review
- Activity-cliff awareness enables robust graph learning for molecular property prediction.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Continuous Inhibition-Zone Modeling and Binary Classification forPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Accurate prediction of activity cliff compounds based on bioactivity profiles depends on assay nearest neighbor relationships.Journal of cheminformatics · 2026Article
- Review on Predictive Models and Integration Strategies for Holistic Impact Assessment of Chemicals and Materials.Environmental science & technology · 2026Review
- AMPCliff: Quantitative definition and benchmarking of activity cliffs in antimicrobial peptides.Journal of advanced research · 2026Article
- Optimizing skin sensitization prediction across activity cliffs: a comparative analysis of K-nearest neighbours vs random Forest.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Article
- What is the future role of quantum computation in drug discovery?Emerging topics in life sciences · 2025Review
- ACES-GNN: can graph neural network learn to explain activity cliffs?Digital discovery · 2025Article
- ACtriplet: An improved deep learning model for activity cliffs prediction by in tegrating triplet loss and pre-training.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2025Article
- The topology of molecular representations and its influence on machine learning performance.Journal of cheminformatics · 2025Article
- GraphGIM: rethinking molecular graph contrastive learning via geometry image modeling.BMC biology · 2025Article
- The Quasi-Bound State as a Predictor of Relative Binding Free Energy.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- Machine Learning for Toxicity Prediction Using Chemical Structures: Pillars for Success in the Real World.Chemical research in toxicology · 2025Review
- Activity cliff-aware reinforcement learning for de novo drug design.Journal of cheminformatics · 2025Article
- Extended Activity Cliffs-Driven Approaches on Data Splitting for the Study of Bioactivity Machine Learning Predictions.Molecular informatics · 2025Article
- Sort & Slice: a simple and superior alternative to hash-based folding for extended-connectivity fingerprints.Journal of cheminformatics · 2024Article
- OLB-AC: toward optimizing ligand bioactivities through deep graph learning and activity cliffs.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Performance and robustness of small molecule retention time prediction with molecular graph neural networks in industrial drug discovery campaigns.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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
introduction and methodologyPairs of similar compounds that only differ by a small structural modification but exhibit a large difference in their binding affinity for a given target are known as activity cliffs (ACs). It has been hypothesised that QSAR models struggle to predict ACs and that ACs thus form a major source of prediction error. However, the AC-prediction power of modern QSAR methods and its quantitative relationship to general QSAR-prediction performance is still underexplored. We systematically construct nine distinct QSAR models by combining three molecular representation methods (extended-connectivity fingerprints, physicochemical-descriptor vectors and graph isomorphism networks) with three regression techniques (random forests, k-nearest neighbours and multilayer perceptrons); we then use each resulting model to classify pairs of similar compounds as ACs or non-ACs and to predict the activities of individual molecules in three case studies: dopamine receptor D2, factor Xa, and SARS-CoV-2 main protease. RESULTS AND
conclusionsOur results provide strong support for the hypothesis that indeed QSAR models frequently fail to predict ACs. We observe low AC-sensitivity amongst the evaluated models when the activities of both compounds are unknown, but a substantial increase in AC-sensitivity when the actual activity of one of the compounds is given. Graph isomorphism features are found to be competitive with or superior to classical molecular representations for AC-classification and can thus be employed as baseline AC-prediction models or simple compound-optimisation tools. For general QSAR-prediction, however, extended-connectivity fingerprints still consistently deliver the best performance amongs the tested input representations. A potential future pathway to improve QSAR-modelling performance might be the development of techniques to increase AC-sensitivity.
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.