Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40596104›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Cross modality learning of cell painting and transcriptomics data improves mechanism of action clustering and bioactivity modelling.

Son V Ha, Steffen Jaensch, Maciej M Kańduła, Dorota Herman, Paul Czodrowski, Hugo Ceulemans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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. 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

6 authors.

Son V HaJohnson & Johnson, Beerse, Belgium.
Steffen JaenschJohnson & Johnson, Beerse, Belgium. sjaensch@its.jnj.com.
Maciej M KańdułaJohnson & Johnson, Vienna, Austria.
Dorota HermanJohnson & Johnson, Beerse, Belgium.
Paul CzodrowskiDepartment of Chemistry, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Hugo CeulemansJohnson & Johnson, Beerse, Belgium.

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 956832
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In drug discovery, different data modalities (chemical structure, cell biology, quantum mechanics, etc.) are abundant, and their integration can help with understanding aspects of chemistry, biology, and their interactions. Within cell biology, cell painting (CP) and transcriptomics RNA-Seq (TX) screens are powerful tools in early drug discovery, as they are complementary views of the biological effect of compounds on a population of cells post-treatment. While multimodal learning of chemical structure-cell painting, or different omics data has been experimented; a cell painting-bulk transcriptomics multimodal model is still unexplored. In this work, we benchmark two representation learning methods: contrastive learning and bimodal autoencoder. We use the setting of cross modality learning where representation learning is performed with two modalities (CP and TX), but only cell painting is available for new compounds embeddings generation and downstream task. This is because for new compounds, we would only have CP data and not TX, due to high data generation cost of the RNA-Seq screen. We show that in the absence of TX features for new compounds, using learned embeddings like those obtained from Constrastive Learning enhances performance of CP features on tasks where TX features excels but CP features does not. Additionally, we observed that learned representation improves cluster quality for clustering of CP replicates and different mechanisms of action (MoA), as well as improves performance on several subsets of bioactivity tasks grouped by protein target families.

Indexed as

Drug DiscoveryGene Expression ProfilingMachine LearningTranscriptomeCluster AnalysisHumansRNA-Seq

Identifiers

PMID40596104
PMCPMC12216865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.