Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38651738›Full record

ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2024

FEP Augmentation as a Means to Solve Data Paucity Problems for Machine Learning in Chemical Biology.

Pieter B Burger, Xiaohu Hu, Ilya Balabin, Morné Muller, Megan Stanley, Fourie Joubert, Thomas M Kaiser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Benchmarking Docking Protocols on Predicting Alternative Binding Modes.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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.

Pieter B BurgerAvicenna Biosciences Inc., 101 W. Chapel Hill Street, Suite 210, Durham, North Carolina 27001, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0272-1111
Xiaohu HuSchrödinger, Inc., 120 West 45th Street, New York, New York 10036, United States.
Ilya BalabinAvicenna Biosciences Inc., 101 W. Chapel Hill Street, Suite 210, Durham, North Carolina 27001, United States.
Morné MullerAvicenna Biosciences Inc., 101 W. Chapel Hill Street, Suite 210, Durham, North Carolina 27001, United States.
Megan StanleyMicrosoft Research AI4Science, 21 Station Road, Cambridge CB1 2FB, U.K.
Fourie JoubertCentre for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, Department of Biochemistry, Genetics and Microbiology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0001, South Africa.
Thomas M KaiserAvicenna Biosciences Inc., 101 W. Chapel Hill Street, Suite 210, Durham, North Carolina 27001, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5174-9183

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the realm of medicinal chemistry, the primary objective is to swiftly optimize a multitude of chemical properties of a set of compounds to yield a clinical candidate poised for clinical trials. In recent years, two computational techniques, machine learning (ML) and physics-based methods, have evolved substantially and are now frequently incorporated into the medicinal chemist's toolbox to enhance the efficiency of both hit optimization and candidate design. Both computational methods come with their own set of limitations, and they are often used independently of each other. ML's capability to screen extensive compound libraries expediently is tempered by its reliance on quality data, which can be scarce especially during early-stage optimization. Contrarily, physics-based approaches like free energy perturbation (FEP) are frequently constrained by low throughput and high cost by comparison; however, physics-based methods are capable of making highly accurate binding affinity predictions. In this study, we harnessed the strength of FEP to overcome data paucity in ML by generating virtual activity data sets which then inform the training of algorithms. Here, we show that ML algorithms trained with an FEP-augmented data set could achieve comparable predictive accuracy to data sets trained on experimental data from biological assays. Throughout the paper, we emphasize key mechanistic considerations that must be taken into account when aiming to augment data sets and lay the groundwork for successful implementation. Ultimately, the study advocates for the synergy of physics-based methods and ML to expedite the lead optimization process. We believe that the physics-based augmentation of ML will significantly benefit drug discovery, as these techniques continue to evolve.

Indexed as

Machine LearningAlgorithmsDrug DiscoveryHumansThermodynamics

Identifiers

PMID38651738
PMCPMC11094716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.