Cited by 261Computational Drug Discovery MethodsRecommender Systems and TechniquesBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

A unified drug–target interaction prediction framework based on knowledge graph and recommendation system

Open access
Ye, Qing, Hsieh, Chang-Yu, Yang, Ziyi, Kang, Yu, Chen, Jiming, Cao, Dongsheng, He, Shibo, Hou, Tingjun·2021·Nature Communications

Abstract

Prediction of drug-target interactions (DTI) plays a vital role in drug development in various areas, such as virtual screening, drug repurposing and identification of potential drug side effects. Despite extensive efforts have been invested in perfecting DTI prediction, existing methods still suffer from the high sparsity of DTI datasets and the cold start problem. Here, we develop KGE_NFM, a unified framework for DTI prediction by combining knowledge graph (KG) and recommendation system. This framework firstly learns a low-dimensional representation for various entities in the KG, and then integrates the multimodal information via neural factorization machine (NFM). KGE_NFM is evaluated under three realistic scenarios, and achieves accurate and robust predictions on four benchmark datasets, especially in the scenario of the cold start for proteins. Our results indicate that KGE_NFM provides valuable insight to integrate KG and recommendation system-based techniques into a unified framework for novel DTI discovery.

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 · 10.1038/s41467-021-27137-3

Cites

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Developments in heterogeneous relationship predictions introduced and formalized a new framework that takes into account network heterogeneity by defining type-specific node-edge paths or meta-paths.

    “Developments in heterogeneous (54) relationship predictions (55) introduced and formalized a new framework that takes into account network heterogeneity by defining typespecific node-edge paths or meta-paths (56).”

    From Artificial Intelligence for Drug Discovery: Are We There Yet? (2024) · cites this paper as [54]

    The Methods section ('The workflow of KGE_NFM'; page unavailable) describes a framework that represents heterogeneous biomedical concepts as node types and their associations as edge types. It does not describe defining type-specific node–edge paths or meta-paths, so the claimed means of formalizing the framework is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.81)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 68 · Cited by 261

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. [19]Gilmer, J., Schoenholz, S. S., Riley, P. F., Vinyals, O. & Dahl, G. E. in Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning Vol. 70 (eds Precup Doina & Teh Yee Whye) 1263–1272 (PMLR, Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 2017).
  2. [24]Zheng, X., Ding, H., Mamitsuka, H. & Zhu, S. in Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining 1025–1033 (2013).
  3. [35]Alaimo, S., Giugno, R. & Pulvirenti, A. in Data Mining Techniques for the Life Sciences (Springer, 2016).
  4. [36]Bhargava, H., Sharma, A. & Suravajhala, P. in Rising Threats in Expert Applications and Solutions (Springer, 2021).
  5. [40]Walsh, B., Mohamed, S. K. & Nováček, V. in Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management 3173–3180 (2020).
  6. [54]He, X. & Chua, T.-S. in Proceedings of the 40th International ACM SIGIR conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 355–364 (2017).
  7. [70]Davis, J. & Goadrich, M. in Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning 233–240 (2006).
  8. [72]Yu, H.-F., Jain, P., Kar, P. & Dhillon, I. in International conference on machine learning 593–601 (PMLR).

Authors
Ye, Q., Hsieh, C.-Y., Yang, Z., Kang, Y., Chen, J., Cao, D., He, S., & Hou, T.
Affiliations
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
  • Tencent (China) (CN)
  • Central South University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Cao, Dongsheng
  • He, Shibo
  • Hou, Tingjun
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2021-11-22
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
6775-6775
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3217681006
Cited by
261
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 80 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 26
FWCI
21.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (62088101)
  • Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (LZ19H300001)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
drug-target interaction prediction, knowledge graph embedding, recommender systems, cold start, multimodal data integration, drug repurposing, virtual screening, drug side effect prediction
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Drug Development, Drug Interactions, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Models, Theoretical, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Knowledge, Drug Repositioning, Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions

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