ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical analysis2025
Predicting cardiotoxicity in drug development: A deep learning approach.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical analysis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- MacroTox: A Macroscopic Graph Topology-Based Multimodal Learning Framework for Robust Molecular Toxicity Prediction.JACS Au · 2026Article
- AI/ML-based computational models for toxicity prediction.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2026Review
- Multi-task deep learning models for mechanism-based prediction of developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART) using ToxCast bioassays.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiotoxicity is a critical issue in drug development that poses serious health risks, including potentially fatal arrhythmias. The human ether-à-go-go related gene (hERG) potassium channel, as one of the primary targets of cardiotoxicity, has garnered widespread attention. Traditional cardiotoxicity testing methods are expensive and time-consuming, making computational virtual screening a suitable alternative. In this study, we employed machine learning techniques utilizing molecular fingerprints and descriptors to predict the cardiotoxicity of compounds, with the aim of improving prediction accuracy and efficiency. We used four types of molecular fingerprints and descriptors combined with machine learning and deep learning algorithms, including Gaussian naive Bayes (NB), random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), K-nearest neighbors (KNN), eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and Transformer models, to build predictive models. Our models demonstrated advanced predictive performance. The best machine learning model, XGBoost Morgan, achieved an accuracy (ACC) value of 0.84, and the deep learning model, Transformer_Morgan, achieved the best ACC value of 0.85, showing a high ability to distinguish between toxic and non-toxic compounds. On an external independent validation set, it achieved the best area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.93, surpassing ADMETlab3.0, Cardpred, and CardioDPi. In addition, we explored the integration of molecular descriptors and fingerprints to enhance model performance and found that ensemble methods, such as voting and stacking, provided slight improvements in model stability. Furthermore, the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) explanations revealed the relationship between benzene rings, fluorine-containing groups, NH groups, oxygen in ether groups, and cardiotoxicity, highlighting the importance of these features. This study not only improved the predictive accuracy of cardiotoxicity models but also promoted a more reliable and scientifically interpretable method for drug safety assessment. Using computational methods, this study facilitates a more efficient drug development process, reduces costs, and improves the safety of new drug candidates, ultimately benefiting medical and public health.
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.