Identification of lead anti-human cytomegalovirus compounds targeting MAP4K4 via machine learning analysis of kinase inhibitor screening data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemogenomic approaches involving highly annotated compound sets and cell based high throughput screening are emerging as a means to identify novel drug targets. We have previously screened a collection of highly characterized kinase inhibitors (Khan et al., Journal of General Virology, 2016) to identify compounds that increase or decrease expression of a human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) protein in infected cells. To identify potential novel anti-HCMV drug targets we used a machine learning approach to relate our phenotypic data from the aforementioned screen to kinase inhibition profiling of compounds used in this screen. Several of the potential targets had no previously reported role in HCMV replication. We focused on one potential anti-HCMV target, MAPK4K, and identified lead compounds inhibiting MAP4K4 that have anti-HCMV activity with little cellular cytotoxicity. We found that treatment of HCMV infected cells with inhibitors of MAP4K4, or an siRNA that inhibited MAP4K4 production, reduced HCMV replication and impaired detection of IE2-60, a viral protein necessary for efficient HCMV replication. Our findings demonstrate the potential of this machine learning approach to identify novel anti-viral drug targets, which can inform the discovery of novel anti-viral lead compounds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".