Cargando…
Implications of Additivity and Nonadditivity for Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models in Drug Design
[Image: see text] Matched molecular pairs (MMPs) are nowadays a commonly applied concept in drug design. They are used in many computational tools for structure–activity relationship analysis, biological activity prediction, or optimization of physicochemical properties. However, until now it has no...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Chemical Society
2022
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9352238/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35936431 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c02738 |
_version_ | 1784762611527581696 |
---|---|
author | Kwapien, Karolina Nittinger, Eva He, Jiazhen Margreitter, Christian Voronov, Alexey Tyrchan, Christian |
author_facet | Kwapien, Karolina Nittinger, Eva He, Jiazhen Margreitter, Christian Voronov, Alexey Tyrchan, Christian |
author_sort | Kwapien, Karolina |
collection | PubMed |
description | [Image: see text] Matched molecular pairs (MMPs) are nowadays a commonly applied concept in drug design. They are used in many computational tools for structure–activity relationship analysis, biological activity prediction, or optimization of physicochemical properties. However, until now it has not been shown in a rigorous way that MMPs, that is, changing only one substituent between two molecules, can be predicted with higher accuracy and precision in contrast to any other chemical compound pair. It is expected that any model should be able to predict such a defined change with high accuracy and reasonable precision. In this study, we examine the predictability of four classical properties relevant for drug design ranging from simple physicochemical parameters (log D and solubility) to more complex cell-based ones (permeability and clearance), using different data sets and machine learning algorithms. Our study confirms that additive data are the easiest to predict, which highlights the importance of recognition of nonadditivity events and the challenging complexity of predicting properties in case of scaffold hopping. Despite deep learning being well suited to model nonlinear events, these methods do not seem to be an exception of this observation. Though they are in general performing better than classical machine learning methods, this leaves the field with a still standing challenge. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9352238 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | American Chemical Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93522382022-08-05 Implications of Additivity and Nonadditivity for Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models in Drug Design Kwapien, Karolina Nittinger, Eva He, Jiazhen Margreitter, Christian Voronov, Alexey Tyrchan, Christian ACS Omega [Image: see text] Matched molecular pairs (MMPs) are nowadays a commonly applied concept in drug design. They are used in many computational tools for structure–activity relationship analysis, biological activity prediction, or optimization of physicochemical properties. However, until now it has not been shown in a rigorous way that MMPs, that is, changing only one substituent between two molecules, can be predicted with higher accuracy and precision in contrast to any other chemical compound pair. It is expected that any model should be able to predict such a defined change with high accuracy and reasonable precision. In this study, we examine the predictability of four classical properties relevant for drug design ranging from simple physicochemical parameters (log D and solubility) to more complex cell-based ones (permeability and clearance), using different data sets and machine learning algorithms. Our study confirms that additive data are the easiest to predict, which highlights the importance of recognition of nonadditivity events and the challenging complexity of predicting properties in case of scaffold hopping. Despite deep learning being well suited to model nonlinear events, these methods do not seem to be an exception of this observation. Though they are in general performing better than classical machine learning methods, this leaves the field with a still standing challenge. American Chemical Society 2022-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9352238/ /pubmed/35936431 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c02738 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Permits non-commercial access and re-use, provided that author attribution and integrity are maintained; but does not permit creation of adaptations or other derivative works (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Kwapien, Karolina Nittinger, Eva He, Jiazhen Margreitter, Christian Voronov, Alexey Tyrchan, Christian Implications of Additivity and Nonadditivity for Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models in Drug Design |
title | Implications of
Additivity and Nonadditivity for Machine
Learning and Deep Learning Models in Drug Design |
title_full | Implications of
Additivity and Nonadditivity for Machine
Learning and Deep Learning Models in Drug Design |
title_fullStr | Implications of
Additivity and Nonadditivity for Machine
Learning and Deep Learning Models in Drug Design |
title_full_unstemmed | Implications of
Additivity and Nonadditivity for Machine
Learning and Deep Learning Models in Drug Design |
title_short | Implications of
Additivity and Nonadditivity for Machine
Learning and Deep Learning Models in Drug Design |
title_sort | implications of
additivity and nonadditivity for machine
learning and deep learning models in drug design |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9352238/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35936431 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c02738 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kwapienkarolina implicationsofadditivityandnonadditivityformachinelearninganddeeplearningmodelsindrugdesign AT nittingereva implicationsofadditivityandnonadditivityformachinelearninganddeeplearningmodelsindrugdesign AT hejiazhen implicationsofadditivityandnonadditivityformachinelearninganddeeplearningmodelsindrugdesign AT margreitterchristian implicationsofadditivityandnonadditivityformachinelearninganddeeplearningmodelsindrugdesign AT voronovalexey implicationsofadditivityandnonadditivityformachinelearninganddeeplearningmodelsindrugdesign AT tyrchanchristian implicationsofadditivityandnonadditivityformachinelearninganddeeplearningmodelsindrugdesign |