MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174739771 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2021.617537

Computational Drug Repurposing for Alzheimer’s Disease Using Risk Genes From GWAS and Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Studies

2021· article· en· W3174739771 on OpenAlexaff
Yun Xu, Jiming Kong, Pingzhao Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrug repositioningGenome-wide association studyComputational biologyTranscriptomeBiologyGeneDrugBioinformaticsPharmacologyMedicineGeneticsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Traditional therapeutics targeting Alzheimer’s disease (AD)-related subpathologies have so far proved ineffective. Drug repurposing, a more effective strategy that aims to find new indications for existing drugs against other diseases, offers benefits in AD drug development. In this study, we aim to identify potential anti-AD agents through enrichment analysis of drug-induced transcriptional profiles of pathways based on AD-associated risk genes identified from genome-wide association analyses (GWAS) and single-cell transcriptomic studies. Methods: We systematically constructed four gene lists (972 risk genes) from GWAS and single-cell transcriptomic studies and performed functional and genes overlap analyses in Enrichr tool. We then used a comprehensive drug repurposing tool Gene2Drug by combining drug-induced transcriptional responses with the associated pathways to compute candidate drugs from each gene list. Prioritized potential candidates (eight drugs) were further assessed with literature review. Results: The genomic-based gene lists contain late-onset AD associated genes (BIN1, ABCA7, APOE, CLU, and PICALM) and clinical AD drug targets (TREM2, CD33, CHRNA2, PRSS8, ACE, TKT, APP, and GABRA1). Our analysis identified eight AD candidate drugs (ellipticine, alsterpaullone, tomelukast, ginkgolide A, chrysin, ouabain, sulindac sulfide and lorglumide), four of which (alsterpaullone, ginkgolide A, chrysin and ouabain) have shown repurposing potential for AD validated by their preclinical evidence and moderate toxicity profiles from literature. These support the value of pathway-based prioritization based on the disease risk genes from GWAS and scRNA-seq data analysis. Conclusion: Our analysis strategy identified some potential drug candidates for AD. Although the drugs still need further experimental validation, the approach may be applied to repurpose drugs for other neurological disorders using their genomic information identified from large-scale genomic studies.

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)0.000
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 score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations35
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207