MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414071613 · doi:10.1080/17568919.2025.2557178

Half-life prediction of central nervous system (CNS) small molecules in humans using gradient tree boosting

2025· article· en· W4414071613 on OpenAlexaff
Hong Wang, Pan Zhang, Stephen J. Barigye, James R. Empfield, Steven S. Wesolowski

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Medicinal Chemistry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsXenon Pharmaceuticals (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrioritizationBoosting (machine learning)Gradient boostingCentral nervous systemSmall moleculeTree (set theory)Drug discovery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims To develop a machine learning (ML) model for early-stage prediction of human half-life of oral central nervous system (CNS) drugs and to establish a curated dataset, including key in vitro and in vivo data, to support future modeling efforts.Materials & methods Human and rat half-life, plasma protein binding (PPB), and liver microsomal clearance (LM) data for 76 diverse CNS drugs and candidates were obtained from public sources or evaluated at WuXi AppTec. Gradient tree boosting (GTB) models were constructed using ChemAxon’s Trainer Engine. Feature importance was assessed, and model performance was evaluated on an external validation set.Results The best-performing model achieved 82.4% of predictions within two-fold of observed values, with a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.75 and a root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.25. Good generalizability was confirmed using similarity-based data splitting and Y-randomization. Integration of in vitro features, preclinical in vivo data, and physicochemical properties substantially improved predictive performance. Key features driving accurate human half-life prediction were identified.Conclusion This model demonstrates practical applications for early-stage prediction of human half-life and prioritization of CNS drug candidates. The curated dataset offers a valuable resource to enhance internal databases and advance more robust predictive models.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture Medicinal ChemistrySame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207