Cited by 6Computational Drug Discovery MethodsDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsMachine Learning in Materials Science

Prediction of Inhibitory Activity against the MATE1 Transporter via Combined Fingerprint- and Physics-Based Machine Learning Models

Open access
Handa, Koichi, Sasaki, Shunta, Asano, Satoshi, Kageyama, Michiharu, Iijima, Takeshi, Bender, Andreas·2024·Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Renal secretion plays an important role in excretion of drug from the kidney. Two major transporters known to be highly involved in renal secretion are MATE1/2 K and OCT2, the former of which is highly related to drug–drug interactions. Among published in silico models for MATE inhibitors, a previous model obtained a ROC-AUC value of 0.78 using high throughput percentage inhibition data [ J. Med. Chem. 2013, 56 (3), 781–795] which we aimed to improve upon here using a combined fingerprint and physics-based approach. To this end, we collected 225 publicly available compounds with pIC50 values against MATE1. Subsequently, on the one hand, we performed a physics-based approach using an Alpha-Fold protein structure, from which we obtained MM–GB/SA scores for those compounds. On the other hand, we built Random Forest (RF) and message passing neural network models using extended-connectivity fingerprints with radius 4 (ECFP4) and chemical structures as graphs, respectively, which also included MM–GB/SA scores as input variables. In a five-fold cross-validation with a separate test set, we found that the best predictivity for the hold-out test was observed in the RF model (including ECFP4 and MM–GB/SA data) with an ROC-AUC of 0.833 ± 0.036; while that of the MM–GB/SA regression model was 0.742. However, the MM–GB/SA model did not show a dependency of the performance on the particular chemical space being predicted. Additionally, via structural interaction fingerprint analysis, we identified interacting residues with inhibitor as identical for those with noninhibitors, including substrates, such as Gln49, Trp274, Tyr277, Tyr299, Ile303, and Tyr306. The similar binding modes are consistent with the observed similar IC50 value inhibitor when using different substrates experimentally, and practically, this can release the experimental scientists from bothering of selecting substrates for MATE1. Hence, we were able to build highly predictive classification models for MATE1 inhibitory activity with both ECFP4 and MM–GB/SA score as input features, which is fit-for-purpose for use in the drug discovery process.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.jcim.4c00921

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Handa, K., Sasaki, S., Asano, S., Kageyama, M., Iijima, T., & Bender, A.
Affiliations
  • Centre for Molecular Informatics, Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Lensfield Road, Cambridge CB2 1EW, U.K.
  • Teijin Pharma Limited (Japan) (JP)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Bender, Andreas
Venue
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
Published
2024-09-10
Volume
64
Issue
18
Pages
7068-7076
ISSN
  • 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-960X
OpenAlex
W4402407845
Cited by
6
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • ChemRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
Teijin Pharma
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Drug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
Keywords
MATE1, transporter inhibitors, drug-drug interactions, ECFP4, message passing neural networks, random forest, binding site residues, AlphaFold protein structure
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Humans, Models, Molecular, Neural Networks, Computer, Organic Cation Transport Proteins

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review