MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137075120 · doi:10.1534/g3.113.006437

Miniature Short Hairpin RNA Screens to Characterize Antiproliferative Drugs

2013· article· en· W2137075120 on OpenAlexaff
Saranya Kittanakom, Anthony Arnoldo, Kevin R. Brown, Iain M. Wallace, Tada Kunavisarut, Dax Torti, Lawrence E. Heisler, Anuradha Surendra, Jason Moffat, Guri Giaever, Corey Nislow

Bibliographic record

VenueG3 Genes Genomes Genetics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsRNA interferenceComputational biologyDrug discoveryPhenotypic screeningBiologySmall hairpin RNASmall moleculeDrugMechanism of actionCell biologyGeneRNAPhenotypeBioinformaticsPharmacologyGeneticsIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of new proteomics and genomics technologies support a view in which few drugs act solely by inhibiting a single cellular target. Indeed, drug activity is modulated by complex, often incompletely understood cellular mechanisms. Therefore, efforts to decipher mode of action through genetic perturbation such as RNAi typically yields "hits" that fall into several categories. Of particular interest to the present study, we aimed to characterize secondary activities of drugs on cells. Inhibiting a known target can result in clinically relevant synthetic phenotypes. In one scenario, drug perturbation could, for example, improperly activate a protein that normally inhibits a particular kinase. In other cases, additional, lower affinity targets can be inhibited as in the example of inhibition of c-Kit observed in Bcr-Abl-positive cells treated with Gleevec. Drug transport and metabolism also play an important role in the way any chemicals act within the cells. Finally, RNAi per se can also affect cell fitness by more general off-target effects, e.g., via the modulation of apoptosis or DNA damage repair. Regardless of the root cause of these unwanted effects, understanding the scope of a drug's activity and polypharmacology is essential for better understanding its mechanism(s) of action, and such information can guide development of improved therapies. We describe a rapid, cost-effective approach to characterize primary and secondary effects of small-molecules by using small-scale libraries of virally integrated short hairpin RNAs. We demonstrate this principle using a "minipool" composed of shRNAs that target the genes encoding the reported protein targets of approved drugs. Among the 28 known reported drug-target pairs, we successfully identify 40% of the targets described in the literature and uncover several unanticipated drug-target interactions based on drug-induced synthetic lethality. We provide a detailed protocol for performing such screens and for analyzing the data. This cost-effective approach to mammalian knockdown screens, combined with the increasing maturation of RNAi technology will expand the accessibility of similar approaches in academic settings.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueG3 Genes Genomes GeneticsSame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207