MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014476243 · doi:10.1101/2020.03.29.014381

Computational Prediction of the Comprehensive SARS-CoV-2 vs. Human Interactome to Guide the Design of Therapeutics

2020· preprint· en· W3014476243 on OpenAlexafffund
Kevin Dick, Kyle K. Biggar, James R. Green

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInteractomeComputational biologyIn silicoCoronavirusBiologyHuman proteinsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)SubsequenceProtein–protein interactionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BioinformaticsDiseaseGeneticsGeneMedicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract Understanding the disease pathogenesis of the novel coronavirus, denoted SARS-CoV-2, is critical to the development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 therapeutics. The global propagation of the viral disease, denoted COVID-19 (“coronavirus disease 2019”), has unified the scientific community in searching for possible inhibitory small molecules or polypeptides. Given the known interaction between the human ACE2 (“Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2”) protein and the SARS-CoV virus (responsible for the coronavirus outbreak circa . 2003), considerable focus has been directed towards the putative interaction between the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein and ACE2. However, a more holistic understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 vs. human inter-species interactome promises additional putative protein-protein interactions (PPI) that may be considered targets for the development of inhibitory therapeutics. To that end, we leverage two state-of-the-art, sequence-based PPI predictors (PIPE4 & SPRINT) capable of generating the comprehensive SARS-CoV-2 vs. human interactome, comprising approximately 285,000 pairwise predictions. Of these, we identify the high-scoring subset of human proteins predicted to interact with each of the 14 SARS-CoV-2 proteins by both methods, comprising 279 high-confidence putative interactions involving 225 human proteins. Notably, the Spike-ACE2 interaction was the highest ranked for both the PIPE4 and SPRINT predictors, corroborating existing evidence for this PPI. Furthermore, the PIPE-Sites algorithm was used to predict the putative subsequence that might mediate each interaction and thereby inform the design of inhibitory polypeptides intended to disrupt the corresponding host-pathogen interactions. We hereby publicly release the comprehensive set of PPI predictions and their corresponding PIPE-Sites landscapes in the following DataVerse repository: 10.5683/SP2/JZ77XA. All data and metadata are released under a CC-BY 4.0 licence. The information provided represents theoretical modeling only and caution should be exercised in its use. It is intended as a resource for the scientific community at large in furthering our understanding of SARS-CoV-2.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207