Inferring Interactions between Novel Drugs and Novel Targets via Instance-Neighborhood-Based Models.

BACKGROUND Experimental approaches to identify drug-target interactions (DTIs) among a large number of chemical compounds and proteins are still costly and time-consuming. As an assistant, computational approaches are able to rapidly infer potential drug or target candidates for diverse screenings on a large scale. The most difficult scenario (S4) of screenings tries to explore the pairwise interacting candidates between newly designed chemical compounds (new potential drugs) and proteins (new target candidates). Few of current computational approaches can be applied to the inference of potential DTIs in S4 because the new potential drugs have no known target and the new target candidates have no existing drug at all. In addition, due to the essential issues among DTI, such as missing DTIs and the imbalance between few approved DTIs and many unknown drug-target pairs, existing metrics of DTI inference may not reflect the performance of inferring approaches fairly. METHODS To address these issues, this paper develops three instance neighborhood-based models: individualto- individual (I2I), individual-to-group (I2G) and nearest-neighbor-zone (NNZ). In I2I, if a new drug tends to interact with individual targets similar to a new target of interest, it likely interacts with the new target. In I2G, the new drug possibly interacts with the new target if it tends to interact with a target group, in which member targets are similar to each other and one or more of them are similar to the new target. In NNZ, the pair of the new drug and the new target is a potential DTI if it is similar to known existing DTIs. This paper also designs a topological dense index to guide the selection of the appropriate models when given different datasets. Moreover, an additional metric Coverage is introduced to enhance the assessment of DTI inference. RESULTS Performed on four benchmark datasets, our models demonstrate that the instance neighborhood can improve the DTI inference significantly. Under the guidance of our topological dense index, the best models for the datasets are chosen and achieve inspiring performances, including ~85%, ~81%, ~86% and ~81% in terms of AUC and ~29%, ~32%, ~32% and ~33% in terms of AUPR respectively. The superiority of our models is demonstrated by both the comparison with two state-of-the-art approaches and the novel DTI inference. CONCLUSION By leveraging the instance neighborhood, our models are able to infer DTIs in the most difficult scenario S4. Moreover, our topological dense index can guide the appropriate models when given different datasets.

[1]  T. Poggio,et al.  The Mathematics of Learning: Dealing with Data , 2005, 2005 International Conference on Neural Networks and Brain.

[2]  E. Marchiori,et al.  Predicting Drug-Target Interactions for New Drug Compounds Using a Weighted Nearest Neighbor Profile , 2013, PloS one.

[3]  Yong-Yeol Ahn,et al.  Optimizing drug–target interaction prediction based on random walk on heterogeneous networks , 2015, Journal of Cheminformatics.

[4]  Elena Marchiori,et al.  Gaussian interaction profile kernels for predicting drug-target interaction , 2011, Bioinform..

[5]  Steven J. M. Jones,et al.  A Computational Approach to Finding Novel Targets for Existing Drugs , 2011, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[6]  Chuang Liu,et al.  Prediction of Drug-Target Interactions and Drug Repositioning via Network-Based Inference , 2012, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[7]  Mehmet Gönen,et al.  Predicting drug-target interactions from chemical and genomic kernels using Bayesian matrix factorization , 2012, Bioinform..

[8]  Graziano Pesole,et al.  Regularized Least Squares Cancer Classifiers from DNA microarray data , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[9]  Mark Goadrich,et al.  The relationship between Precision-Recall and ROC curves , 2006, ICML.

[10]  M. Kanehisa,et al.  Development of a chemical structure comparison method for integrated analysis of chemical and genomic information in the metabolic pathways. , 2003, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[11]  Hui Yu,et al.  Predicting Drug-Target Interactions via Within-Score and Between-Score , 2015, BioMed research international.

[12]  Jianyu Shi,et al.  Predicting existing targets for new drugs base on strategies for missing interactions , 2016, BMC Bioinformatics.

[13]  Chunyan Miao,et al.  Neighborhood Regularized Logistic Matrix Factorization for Drug-Target Interaction Prediction , 2016, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[14]  M S Waterman,et al.  Identification of common molecular subsequences. , 1981, Journal of molecular biology.

[15]  Tapio Pahikkala,et al.  Toward more realistic drug^target interaction predictions , 2014 .

[16]  Hao Ding,et al.  Collaborative matrix factorization with multiple similarities for predicting drug-target interactions , 2013, KDD.

[17]  Yongdong Zhang,et al.  Drug-target interaction prediction: databases, web servers and computational models , 2016, Briefings Bioinform..

[18]  Xing Chen,et al.  Drug-target interaction prediction by random walk on the heterogeneous network. , 2012, Molecular bioSystems.

[19]  Jian-Yu Shi,et al.  Predicting drug-target interaction for new drugs using enhanced similarity measures and super-target clustering. , 2015, Methods.

[20]  Yoshihiro Yamanishi,et al.  Prediction of drug–target interaction networks from the integration of chemical and genomic spaces , 2008, ISMB.