deep learning

Proteochemometric models (PCMs) are used in computational drug discovery to employ both protein and ligand representations jointly for bioactivity prediction. While machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) have come to dominate PCMs, often serving as a basis for scoring functions, rigorous evaluation standards have not always been consistently applied. In this study, using kinase-ligand bioactivity prediction as a model system, we highlight the critical roles of data set curation, permutation testing, class imbalances, and various data splitting strategies for mitigating plausible data leakage and embedding quality in determining model performance. Our findings indicate that data splitting and class imbalances are the most critical factors affecting PCM performance, emphasizing the challenges in the generalizing ability of ML/DL-PCMs. We evaluated various protein–ligand descriptors and embeddings, including those augmented with multiple sequence alignment information. However, permutation testing consistently demonstrated that protein embeddings contributed minimally to PCM efficacy. This study advocates for the adoption of stringent evaluation standards to enhance the generalizability of models to out-of-distribution data and improve benchmarking practices.

The RRCGAN, validated through DFT, demonstrates success in generating chemically valid molecules targeting energy gap values with 75% of the generated molecules have RE of <20% of the targeted values.

There has been a recent focus within Alzheimer's Disease (AD) research on potential CSF biomarkers as diagnostic tools. PET imaging and CSF biomarkers have been used to determine the amyloid status of individuals when characterising AD. While these measures have largely correlated with each other, it is also suggested that there could be patients who can have discordant results. However, it is still unclear what proportion of AD subjects demonstrate the discordance. Additionally, whether these changes are associated with different pathological and clinical characteristics of the patients. Here, we investigated the discordance between CSF Aβ42:40 and amyloid status and evaluated whether there are any significant changes in their levels of tau aggregation. 313 participants' data were selected from the ADNI database. The cutoff for Aβ42:40 was then calculated using the Youden Index resulting from receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The formula used was J = maxc Se (c) + Sp (c) - 1, resulting in a maximum cutoff of J = 0.057 for Aβ42:40. This cutoff produced a discordance rate of 10.5%, with n = 33 of 313 patients being discordant. We then performed t-tests to investigate the potential clinical differences between concordant and discordant patients. Independent samples t-tests indicated that levels of pTau181 and total Tau significantly differed between the concordant and discordant groups. pTau181 was significantly lower in the discordant group (t(71.2)=-3.166, p = .002), as was Tau (t(53.9)=-2.046, p = .046). Further data is found in Figure 1. Demonstration of different levels of tau deposition in the discordant groups implies there may be other pathological processes influencing neurodegeneration in these subjects. A discordance of 10% between CSF amyloid and PET amyloid implies that we should evaluate these subjects in greater detail before enrolling them in intervention studies. References 1. Hansson, O. et al. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-019-0485-0 2. Pyun, JM. et al. (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-024-02766-6.