ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Chemical representation standardization needed to generalize metabolic pathway involvement prediction across the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes, Reactome, and MetaCyc knowledgebases.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Motivation: Due to the utility of knowing the pathway involvement of compounds detected in biological experiments, knowledgebases such as the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), Reactome, and MetaCyc have aggregated pathway annotations of compounds. However, these annotations are largely incomplete and are costly to obtain experimentally and curate from published scientific literature. Results: We constructed a new dataset using compounds and their pathway annotations from KEGG, Reactome, and MetaCyc. Using this dataset, we trained and tested an extreme classification model that classifies 8,195 unique pathways based on compound chemical representations with a mean Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) of 0.9036 ± 0.0033. During model evaluation, we discovered an inconsistency in chemical representations across knowledgebases, which was alleviated by standardizing the chemical representations using InChI (IUPAC International Chemical Identifier) canonicalization. Next, we compared the MCC between compounds and their cross-knowledgebase references. The non-standardized chemical representations had a huge 0.2687 drop in MCC while the standardized chemical representations only had a 0.0384 drop in MCC. Thus, standardizing chemical representation is an essential step when predicting on novel chemical representations. Availability and implementation: All code and data for reproducing the results of this manuscript are available in the following figshare items:Manuscript main results: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28701845CV analysis of model and dataset of prior studies: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28701590.
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.