ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2023
Optimization of drug-target affinity prediction methods through feature processing schemes.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiscale graph equivariant diffusion model for 3D molecule design.Science advances · 2025Article
- HNF-DDA: subgraph contrastive-driven transformer-style heterogeneous network embedding for drug-disease association prediction.BMC biology · 2025Article
- A comprehensive review of deep learning-based approaches for drug-drug interaction prediction.Briefings in functional genomics · 2025Review
- Drug-target interaction prediction with collaborative contrastive learning and adaptive self-paced sampling strategy.BMC biology · 2024Article
- A comprehensive review of the recent advances on predicting drug-target affinity based on deep learning.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
motivationNumerous high-accuracy drug-target affinity (DTA) prediction models, whose performance is heavily reliant on the drug and target feature information, are developed at the expense of complexity and interpretability. Feature extraction and optimization constitute a critical step that significantly influences the enhancement of model performance, robustness, and interpretability. Many existing studies aim to comprehensively characterize drugs and targets by extracting features from multiple perspectives; however, this approach has drawbacks: (i) an abundance of redundant or noisy features; and (ii) the feature sets often suffer from high dimensionality.
resultsIn this study, to obtain a model with high accuracy and strong interpretability, we utilize various traditional and cutting-edge feature selection and dimensionality reduction techniques to process self-associated features and adjacent associated features. These optimized features are then fed into learning to rank to achieve efficient DTA prediction. Extensive experimental results on two commonly used datasets indicate that, among various feature optimization methods, the regression tree-based feature selection method is most beneficial for constructing models with good performance and strong robustness. Then, by utilizing Shapley Additive Explanations values and the incremental feature selection approach, we obtain that the high-quality feature subset consists of the top 150D features and the top 20D features have a breakthrough impact on the DTA prediction. In conclusion, our study thoroughly validates the importance of feature optimization in DTA prediction and serves as inspiration for constructing high-performance and high-interpretable models. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://github.com/RUXIAOQING964914140/FS_DTA.
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.