MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133854884 · doi:10.1142/s0219720014500073

Prediction of gene-based drug indications using compendia of public gene expression data and PubMed abstracts

2014· article· en· W2133854884 on OpenAlexaff
Ala Qabaja, Tamer N. Jarada, Abdallah M. ElSheikh, Reda Alhajj

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroarray databasesComputer scienceDrug discoveryRelevance (law)Data miningComputational biologyMicroarray analysis techniquesDiseaseRaw dataBiological dataDrug developmentDrugBioinformaticsGeneBiologyMedicineGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tremendous research effort on diseases and drug discovery has produced a huge amount of important biomedical information which is mostly hidden in the web. In addition, many databases have been created for the purpose of storing enormous amounts of information and high-throughput experiments related to drugs and diseases' effects on genes. Thus, developing an algorithm to integrate biological data from different sources forms one of the greatest challenges in the field of computational biology. Based on our belief that data integration would result in better understanding for the drug mode of action or the disease pathophysiology, we have developed a novel paradigm to integrate data from three major sources in order to predict novel therapeutic drug indications. Microarray data, biomedical text mining data, and gene interaction data have been all integrated to predict ranked lists of genes based on their relevance to a particular drug or disease molecular action. These ranked lists of genes have finally been used as a raw material for building a disease-drug connectivity map based on the enrichment between the up/down tags of a particular disease signature and the ranked lists of drugs. Using this paradigm, we have reported 13% sensitivity improvement in comparison with using microarray or text mining data independently. In addition, our paradigm is able to predict many clinically validated disease-drug associations that could not be captured using microarray or text mining data independently.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bioinformatics and Computational BiologySame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207