Development of a new hazard scoring system in primary neuronal cell cultures for drug-induced acute neuronal toxicity identification in early drug discovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated drug-induced acute neuronal electrophysiological changes using Micro-Electrode arrays (MEA) to rat primary neuronal cell cultures. Data based on 6-key MEA parameters were analyzed for plate-to-plate vehicle variability, effects of positive and negative controls, as well as data from over 100 reference drugs, mostly known to have pharmacological phenotypic and clinical outcomes. A Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression, coupled with expert evaluation helped to identify the 6-key parameters from many other MEA parameters to evaluate the drug-induced acute neuronal changes. Calculating the statistical tolerance intervals for negative-positive control effects on those 4-key parameters helped us to develop a new weighted hazard scoring system on drug-induced potential central nervous system (CNS) adverse effects (AEs). The weighted total score, integrating the effects of a drug candidate on the identified six-pivotal parameters, simply determines if the testing compound/concentration induces potential CNS AEs. Hereto, it uses four different categories of hazard scores: non-neuroactive, neuroactive, hazard, or high hazard categories. This new scoring system was successfully applied to differentiate the new compounds with or without CNS AEs, and the results were correlated with the outcome of in vivo studies in mice for one internal program. Furthermore, the Random Forest classification method was used to obtain the probability that the effect of a compound is either inhibitory or excitatory. In conclusion, this new neuronal scoring system on the cell assay is actively applied in the early de-risking of drug development and reduces the use of animals and associated costs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".