Cited by 4Computational Drug Discovery MethodsFerroptosis and cancer prognosisGene expression and cancer classification

Learning chemical sensitivity reveals mechanisms of cellular response

Open access
Connell, William, Garcia, Kristle, Goodarzi, Hani, Keiser, Michael J.·2024·Communications Biology

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Chemical probes interrogate disease mechanisms at the molecular level by linking genetic changes to observable traits. However, comprehensive chemical screens in diverse biological models are impractical. To address this challenge, we develop ChemProbe, a model that predicts cellular sensitivity to hundreds of molecular probes and drugs by learning to combine transcriptomes and chemical structures. Using ChemProbe, we infer the chemical sensitivity of cancer cell lines and tumor samples and analyze how the model makes predictions. We retrospectively evaluate drug response predictions for precision breast cancer treatment and prospectively validate chemical sensitivity predictions in new cellular models, including a genetically modified cell line. Our model interpretation analysis identifies transcriptome features reflecting compound targets and protein network modules, identifying genes that drive ferroptosis. ChemProbe is an interpretable in silico screening tool that allows researchers to measure cellular response to diverse compounds, facilitating research into molecular mechanisms of chemical sensitivity.

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/s42003-024-06865-4

Cites

6 of 6 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
Connell, W., Garcia, K., Goodarzi, H., & Keiser, M. J.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Keiser, Michael J.
Venue
Communications Biology
Published
2024-09-15
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
1149-1149
ISSN
2399-3642 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4402552237
Cited by
4
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2
FWCI
0.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Communications Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (U01 MH115747-02)
  • Silicon Valley Community Foundation (DAF2018-191905, 10.13039/100014989)
  • Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (DAF2018-191905)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (U01MH115747)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P41GM103504)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Ferroptosis and cancer prognosis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
Keywords
chemosensitivity, drug response prediction, cancer cell lines, tumor samples, ferroptosis, model interpretability, compound targets, virtual screening

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