Cited by 13Computational Drug Discovery MethodsMachine Learning in Bioinformaticsvaccines and immunoinformatics approaches

PINNED: identifying characteristics of druggable human proteins using an interpretable neural network

Open access
Cunningham, Michael, Pins, Danielle, Dezső, Zoltán, Torrent, Maricel, Vasanthakumar, Aparna, Pandey, Abhishek·2023·Journal of Cheminformatics

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The identification of human proteins that are amenable to pharmacologic modulation without significant off-target effects remains an important unsolved challenge. Computational methods have been devised to identify features which distinguish between “druggable” and “undruggable” proteins, finding that protein sequence, tissue and cellular localization, biological role, and position in the protein–protein interaction network are all important discriminant factors. However, many prior efforts to automate the assessment of protein druggability suffer from low performance or poor interpretability. We developed a neural network-based machine learning model capable of generating druggability sub-scores based on each of four distinct categories, combining them to form an overall druggability score. The model achieves an excellent performance in separating drugged and undrugged proteins in the human proteome, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) of 0.95. Our use of multiple sub-scores allows the assessment of potential protein targets of interest based on distinct contributors to druggability, leading to a more interpretable and holistic model to identify novel targets.

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 · 10.1186/s13321-023-00735-7

Cites

1 of 1 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
Cunningham, M., Pins, D., Dezső, Z., Torrent, M., Vasanthakumar, A., & Pandey, A.
Affiliations
AbbVie (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Cunningham, Michael
Venue
Journal of Cheminformatics
Published
2023-07-19
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
64-64
ISSN
1758-2946 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4384820162
Cited by
13
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cheminformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • ChemRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › vaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
Keywords
interpretable neural networks, off-target effects, protein-protein interaction network, protein localization, protein sequence features, drug target identification, human proteome

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