MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract A016: A computational chemistry and AI-driven framework for structure-based drug design informed by underlying factors of mutation-induced drug resistance: A study of KRAS

2025· article· en· W4412163782 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katarzyna Mizgalska, Denis Imbody, Eric B. Haura, Wayne C. Guida, Aleksandra Karolak

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrugDrug resistanceKRASMutationPharmacologyComputational biologyMedicineChemistryCancer researchGeneticsBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mutation-induced drug resistance is a major obstacle in effective cancer treatment. We present a framework that integrates computational chemistry and AI for structure-based drug design targeting drug resistant mutations. To demonstrate the application of our framework, we use Kirsten Rat Sarcoma (KRAS) oncogene as a proof of concept. KRAS is one of the most mutated oncogenes in pancreatic, colorectal, and lung cancers. Mutations in KRAS cause its prolonged activation and excessive cell growth. While the primary mutant KRAS G12C responds to approved covalent inhibitors, several secondary mutations in the binding site (e.g., G12C/Y96C, G12C/Y96S, G12C/Y96D) lead to drug resistance. To understand conformational differences between treatment-sensitive and treatment-resistant populations and to enable structure-based drug design, we conducted molecular dynamics simulations on several drug-free KRAS mutants. Each simulation was performed in triplicate, and trajectory clustering was applied to extract the most populated conformations. Molecular features were calculated for the representative structures. The resulting data were analyzed using three supervised machine learning (ML) models: logistic regression, random forest, and support vector machine. Distinct structural differences in protein dynamics were observed between the two groups, particularly in the switch II binding site region, where covalent inhibitors bind. Variations were detected in residue conformations and the spatial arrangement of molecular features such as hydrogen bond donors and acceptors, as well as aromatic and aliphatic groups. Using ML, we identified that the molecular features of the most populated protein conformations differed significantly between treatment-sensitive and treatment-resistant systems. Notably, solvent exposure and conformational flexibility of residues G10, E62, and H95 within the switch II binding site emerged as the most predictive features of treatment sensitivity, alongside other features such as Lennard-Jones 1-4 energy and backbone mean square displacement. Given these differences, pharmacophores describing the physicochemical and spatial properties of switch II binding site conformations have been extracted for resistant and sensitive systems and will serve as input conditions for generative molecular design. To achieve that, we will utilize existing string- and graph-based generative ML models to design ligands within the binding site of the target. In this approach, the protein binding pocket will be represented by the coordinates of the pharmacophore, guiding the construction of molecular graphs for ligands. Generative ML applied to structure-based drug design will enable the discovery of potential bioactive compounds at an increased rate by accessing vast chemical space. Incorporating protein dynamics into this process provides deeper insights into mutation-induced drug resistance by revealing critical molecular determinants. These insights are essential for guiding the design of selective small molecules against difficult-to-target proteins. Citation Format: Katarzyna Mizgalska, Denis J. Imbody, Eric B. Haura, Wayne C. Guida, Aleksandra Karolak. A computational chemistry and AI-driven framework for structure-based drug design informed by underlying factors of mutation-induced drug resistance: A study of KRAS [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning; 2025 Jul 10-12; Montreal, QC, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2025;31(13_Suppl):Abstract nr A016.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.233
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer Research→Same topicComputational Drug Discovery Methods→French-language works237,207→