Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39052103›Full record

ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2024

From mundane to surprising nonadditivity: drivers and impact on ML models.

Laura Guasch, Niels Maeder, John G Cumming, Christian Kramer

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Laura GuaschRoche Pharma Research and Early Development, Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann- La Roche AG, Basel, 4070, Switzerland. laura.guasch@roche.com.
Niels MaederRoche Pharma Research and Early Development, Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann- La Roche AG, Basel, 4070, Switzerland.
John G CummingRoche Pharma Research and Early Development, Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann- La Roche AG, Basel, 4070, Switzerland.
Christian KramerRoche Pharma Research and Early Development, Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann- La Roche AG, Basel, 4070, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nonadditivity (NA) in Structure-Activity and Structure-Property Relationship (SAR) data is a rare but very information rich phenomenon. It can indicate conformational flexibility, structural rearrangements, and errors in assay results and structural assignment. While purely ligand-based conformational causes of NA are rather well understood and mundane, other factors are less so and cause surprising NA that has a huge influence on SAR analysis and ML model performance. We here report a systematic analysis across a wide range of properties (20 on-target biological activities and 4 physicochemical ADME-related properties) to understand the frequency of various different phenomena that may lead to NA. A set of novel descriptors were developed to characterize double transformation cycles and identify trends in NA. Double transformation cycles were classified into "surprising" and "mundane" categories, with the majority being classed as mundane. We also examined commonalities among surprising cycles, finding LogP differences to have the most significant impact on NA. A distinct behavior of NA for on-target sets compared to ADME sets was observed. Finally, we show that machine learning models struggle with highly nonadditive data, indicating that a better understanding of NA is an important future research direction.

Indexed as

Machine LearningDrug DiscoveryHumansLigandsMolecular ConformationStructure-Activity RelationshipLigandsDescriptorsMachine learningMatched molecular pair analysisNonadditivity analysisSAR

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.