↓ Skip to main content

Computational methods for prediction of in vitro effects of new chemical structures

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cheminformatics, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
Title
Computational methods for prediction of in vitro effects of new chemical structures
Published in
Journal of Cheminformatics, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13321-016-0162-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Priyanka Banerjee, Vishal B. Siramshetty, Malgorzata N. Drwal, Robert Preissner

Abstract

With a constant increase in the number of new chemicals synthesized every year, it becomes important to employ the most reliable and fast in silico screening methods to predict their safety and activity profiles. In recent years, in silico prediction methods received great attention in an attempt to reduce animal experiments for the evaluation of various toxicological endpoints, complementing the theme of replace, reduce and refine. Various computational approaches have been proposed for the prediction of compound toxicity ranging from quantitative structure activity relationship modeling to molecular similarity-based methods and machine learning. Within the "Toxicology in the 21st Century" screening initiative, a crowd-sourcing platform was established for the development and validation of computational models to predict the interference of chemical compounds with nuclear receptor and stress response pathways based on a training set containing more than 10,000 compounds tested in high-throughput screening assays. Here, we present the results of various molecular similarity-based and machine-learning based methods over an independent evaluation set containing 647 compounds as provided by the Tox21 Data Challenge 2014. It was observed that the Random Forest approach based on MACCS molecular fingerprints and a subset of 13 molecular descriptors selected based on statistical and literature analysis performed best in terms of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values. Further, we compared the individual and combined performance of different methods. In retrospect, we also discuss the reasons behind the superior performance of an ensemble approach, combining a similarity search method with the Random Forest algorithm, compared to individual methods while explaining the intrinsic limitations of the latter. Our results suggest that, although prediction methods were optimized individually for each modelled target, an ensemble of similarity and machine-learning approaches provides promising performance indicating its broad applicability in toxicity prediction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 10 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 9%
Computer Science 7 9%
Engineering 6 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 8%
Other 21 28%
Unknown 17 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 September 2016.
All research outputs
#19,631,015
of 24,143,470 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cheminformatics
#860
of 891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,987
of 327,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cheminformatics
#24
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,143,470 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 891 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.