Identification of orthologous target pairs with shared active compounds and comparison of organism-specific activity patterns

Probabilistic Random Forest improves bioactivity predictions close to the classification threshold by taking into account experimental uncertainty

Measurements of protein–ligand interactions have reproducibility limits due to experimental errors. Any model based on such assays will consequentially have such unavoidable errors influencing their performance which should ideally be factored into modelling and output predictions, such as the actual standard deviation of experimental measurements (σ) or the associated comparability of activity values between the aggregated heterogenous activity units (i.e., K_i versus IC₅₀ values) during dataset assimilation. However, experimental errors are usually a neglected aspect of model generation. In order to improve upon the current state-of-the-art, we herein present a novel approach toward predicting protein–ligand interactions using a Probabilistic Random Forest (PRF) classifier. The PRF algorithm was applied toward in silico protein target prediction across ~ 550 tasks from ChEMBL and PubChem. Predictions were evaluated by taking into account various scenarios of experimental standard deviations in both training and test sets and performance was assessed using fivefold stratified shuffled splits for validation. The largest benefit in incorporating the experimental deviation in PRF was observed for data points close to the binary threshold boundary, when such information was not considered in any way in the original RF algorithm. For example, in cases when σ ranged between 0.4–0.6 log units and when ideal probability estimates between 0.4–0.6, the PRF outperformed RF with a median absolute error margin of ~ 17%. In comparison, the baseline RF outperformed PRF for cases with high confidence to belong to the active class (far from the binary decision threshold), although the RF models gave errors smaller than the experimental uncertainty, which could indicate that they were overtrained and/or over-confident. Finally, the PRF models trained with putative inactives decreased the performance compared to PRF models without putative inactives and this could be because putative inactives were not assigned an experimental pXC₅₀ value, and therefore they were considered inactives with a low uncertainty (which in practice might not be true). In conclusion, PRF can be useful for target prediction models in particular for data where class boundaries overlap with the measurement uncertainty, and where a substantial part of the training data is located close to the classification threshold.

Orthologue chemical space and its influence on target prediction

Motivation

In silico approaches often fail to utilize bioactivity data available for orthologous targets due to insufficient evidence highlighting the benefit for such an approach. Deeper investigation into orthologue chemical space and its influence toward expanding compound and target coverage is necessary to improve the confidence in this practice.

Results

Here we present analysis of the orthologue chemical space in ChEMBL and PubChem and its impact on target prediction. We highlight the number of conflicting bioactivities between human and orthologues is low and annotations are overall compatible. Chemical space analysis shows orthologues are chemically dissimilar to human with high intra-group similarity, suggesting they could effectively extend the chemical space modelled. Based on these observations, we show the benefit of orthologue inclusion in terms of novel target coverage. We also benchmarked predictive models using a time-series split and also using bioactivities from Chemistry Connect and HTS data available at AstraZeneca, showing that orthologue bioactivity inclusion statistically improved performance.

Availability and implementation

Orthologue-based bioactivity prediction and the compound training set are available at www.github.com/lhm30/PIDGINv2.

Contact

ab454@cam.ac.uk.

Supplementary information

Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.