Knowledge graphs and their applications in drug discovery
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Knowledge graphs have proven to be promising systems of information storage and retrieval. Due to the recent explosion of heterogeneous multimodal data sources generated in the biomedical domain, and an industry shift toward a systems biology approach, knowledge graphs have emerged as attractive methods of data storage and hypothesis generation. AREAS COVERED: In this review, the author summarizes the applications of knowledge graphs in drug discovery. They evaluate their utility; differentiating between academic exercises in graph theory, and useful tools to derive novel insights, highlighting target identification and drug repurposing as two areas showing particular promise. They provide a case study on COVID-19, summarizing the research that used knowledge graphs to identify repurposable drug candidates. They describe the dangers of degree and literature bias, and discuss mitigation strategies. EXPERT OPINION: Whilst knowledge graphs and graph-based machine learning have certainly shown promise, they remain relatively immature technologies. Many popular link prediction algorithms fail to address strong biases in biomedical data, and only highlight biological associations, failing to model causal relationships in complex dynamic biological systems. These problems need to be addressed before knowledge graphs reach their true potential in drug discovery.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Graph representation learning has been successful in characterizing drugs at the systems level without patient data to predict interactions with other drugs, protein targets, side effects, and diseases.
“Graph representation learning has been successful in characterizing drugs at the systems level without patient data to make predictions about interactions with other drugs, protein targets, side effects, diseases [6, 38, 39, 40, 48, 165].”
From Graph representation learning in biomedicine and healthcare (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 79 · Cited by 105
- Authors
- MacLean, F.
- Affiliations
- BenevolentAI (United Kingdom) (GB)
- Corresponding author
- MacLean, Finlay
- ORCID
- MacLean, Finlay
- Venue
- Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-04-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1057-1069
- ISSN
- 1746-0441 (ISSN-L)
- 1746-045X
- OpenAlex
- W3156260318
- Cited by
- 105
- References
- 79
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 1.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- BenevolentAI
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
- Keywords
- knowledge graphs, drug discovery, drug repurposing, target identification, COVID-19 pandemic, link prediction, graph-based machine learning, biomedical data, hypothesis generation, systems biology
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, COVID-19 Drug Treatment, Algorithms, Computer Graphics, Humans, Systems Biology, Drug Discovery, Drug Repositioning
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