Cited by 43Computational Drug Discovery MethodsBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksGene expression and cancer classification

EMUDRA: Ensemble of Multiple Drug Repositioning Approaches to improve prediction accuracy

Open access
Zhou, Xianxiao, Wang, Minghui, Katsyv, Igor, Irie, Hanna, Zhang, Bin·2018·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Motivation: Availability of large-scale genomic, epigenetic and proteomic data in complex diseases makes it possible to objectively and comprehensively identify the therapeutic targets that can lead to new therapies. The Connectivity Map has been widely used to explore novel indications of existing drugs. However, the prediction accuracy of the existing methods, such as Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistic remains low. Here we present a novel high-performance drug repositioning approach that improves over the state-of-the-art methods. Results: We first designed an expression weighted cosine (EWCos) method to minimize the influence of the uninformative expression changes and then developed an ensemble approach termed ensemble of multiple drug repositioning approaches (EMUDRA) to integrate EWCos and three existing state-of-the-art methods. EMUDRA significantly outperformed individual drug repositioning methods when applied to simulated and independent evaluation datasets. We predicted using EMUDRA and experimentally validated an antibiotic rifabutin as an inhibitor of cell growth in triple negative breast cancer. EMUDRA can identify drugs that more effectively target disease gene signatures and will thus be a useful tool for identifying novel therapies for complex diseases and predicting new indications for existing drugs. Availability and implementation: The EMUDRA R package is available at doi: 10.7303/syn11510888. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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 · 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty325

Cites

52 of 52 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

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?

  • A particular candidate compound identified using molecular signature data alone using an in silico drug repositioning algorithm was able to increase the expression level of ATP6V1A and restore long-term potentiation and memory formation in both cultured neurons and AD mouse models.

    “For instance, a particular candidate compound identified using molecular signature data alone using an in silico drug repositioning algorithm (47) was able to increase the expression level of ATP6V1A and restore long-term potentiation and memory formation in both cultured neurons and AD mouse models (19).”

    From Molecular subtyping of Alzheimer’s disease using RNA sequencing data reveals novel mechanisms and targets (2021) · cites this paper as [47]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    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.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Cheng J., Yang L. (2013) Comparing gene expression similarity metrics for connectivity map. In: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM), pp. 165–170. IEEE.
  2. Colleoni M. et al. (2015) Low-dose oral cyclophosphamide-methotrexate maintenance (CMM) for receptor-negative early breast cancer (BC). In: ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings, p. 1002.
  3. Connolly R.M. et al. (2014) Phase 2 study investigating the safety, efficacy, and surrogate biomarkers of response to 5-azacitidine (5-AZA) and entinostat in advanced breast cancer. In: ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings, p. 569.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhou, X., Wang, M., Katsyv, I., Irie, H., & Zhang, B.
Affiliations
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • Tisch Cancer Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Zhang, Bin
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2018-04-24
Volume
34
Issue
18
Pages
3151-3159
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W2799482038
Cited by
43
References
52
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (R01AG046170, RF1AG054014, U01AG052411, RF1AG057440, R01AG057907, R01CA163772, U01AI111598)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
Keywords
drug repurposing, Connectivity Map, ensemble learning, Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic, drug target prediction, triple-negative breast cancer, rifabutin, drug target identification
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Genomics, Proteomics, Epigenomics, 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