MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200227922 · doi:10.1093/bib/bbab511

Predicting drug–drug interactions by graph convolutional network with multi-kernel

2021· article· en· W4200227922 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBriefings in Bioinformatics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceGraphDrugKernel (algebra)Drug-drug interactionTheoretical computer scienceMedicineMathematicsPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drug repositioning is proposed to find novel usages for existing drugs. Among many types of drug repositioning approaches, predicting drug-drug interactions (DDIs) helps explore the pharmacological functions of drugs and achieves potential drugs for novel treatments. A number of models have been applied to predict DDIs. The DDI network, which is constructed from the known DDIs, is a common part in many of the existing methods. However, the functions of DDIs are different, and thus integrating them in a single DDI graph may overlook some useful information. We propose a graph convolutional network with multi-kernel (GCNMK) to predict potential DDIs. GCNMK adopts two DDI graph kernels for the graph convolutional layers, namely, increased DDI graph consisting of 'increase'-related DDIs and decreased DDI graph consisting of 'decrease'-related DDIs. The learned drug features are fed into a block with three fully connected layers for the DDI prediction. We compare various types of drug features, whereas the target feature of drugs outperforms all other types of features and their concatenated features. In comparison with three different DDI prediction methods, our proposed GCNMK achieves the best performance in terms of area under receiver operating characteristic curve and area under precision-recall curve. In case studies, we identify the top 20 potential DDIs from all unknown DDIs, and the top 10 potential DDIs from the unknown DDIs among breast, colorectal and lung neoplasms-related drugs. Most of them have evidence to support the existence of their interactions. fangxiang.wu@usask.ca.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · 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