Using Weighted Entropy to Rank Chemicals in Quantitative High-Throughput Screening Experiments

Quantitative high-throughput screening (qHTS) experiments can simultaneously produce concentration-response profiles for thousands of chemicals. In a typical qHTS study, a large chemical library is subjected to a primary screen to identify candidate hits for secondary screening, validation studies, or prediction modeling. Different algorithms, usually based on the Hill equation logistic model, have been used to classify compounds as active or inactive (or inconclusive). However, observed concentration-response activity relationships may not adequately fit a sigmoidal curve. Furthermore, it is unclear how to prioritize chemicals for follow-up studies given the large uncertainties that often accompany parameter estimates from nonlinear models. Weighted Shannon entropy can address these concerns by ranking compounds according to profile-specific statistics derived from estimates of the probability mass distribution of response at the tested concentration levels. This strategy can be used to rank all tested chemicals in the absence of a prespecified model structure, or the approach can complement existing activity call algorithms by ranking the returned candidate hits. The weighted entropy approach was evaluated here using data simulated from the Hill equation model. The procedure was then applied to a chemical genomics profiling data set interrogating compounds for androgen receptor agonist activity.

[1]  Pierre R. Bushel,et al.  CEBS—Chemical Effects in Biological Systems: a public data repository integrating study design and toxicity data with microarray and proteomics data , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[2]  S. Rees,et al.  Principles of early drug discovery , 2011, British journal of pharmacology.

[3]  Xia Li,et al.  QDMR: a quantitative method for identification of differentially methylated regions by entropy , 2011, Nucleic acids research.

[4]  F. Collins,et al.  Transforming Environmental Health Protection , 2008, Science.

[5]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Elements of Information Theory , 2005 .

[6]  Ruili Huang,et al.  Chemical Genomics Profiling of Environmental Chemical Modulation of Human Nuclear Receptors , 2011, Environmental health perspectives.

[7]  Pranab Kumar Sen,et al.  Robust Analysis of High Throughput Screening (HTS) Assay Data , 2013, Technometrics.

[8]  Shyamal D Peddada,et al.  Analysis of Nonlinear Regression Models: A Cautionary Note , 2005, Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society.

[9]  Khalid Sayood,et al.  Data Compression Concepts and Algorithms and Their Applications to Bioinformatics , 2009, Entropy.

[10]  M. Bucan,et al.  Promoter features related to tissue specificity as measured by Shannon entropy , 2005, Genome Biology.

[11]  C. Richter,et al.  Estradiol and Bisphenol A Stimulate Androgen Receptor and Estrogen Receptor Gene Expression in Fetal Mouse Prostate Mesenchyme Cells , 2007, Environmental health perspectives.

[12]  Keith R Shockley,et al.  A Three-Stage Algorithm to Make Toxicologically Relevant Activity Calls from Quantitative High Throughput Screening Data , 2012, Environmental health perspectives.

[13]  Anne Mai Wassermann,et al.  Identification of Descriptors Capturing Compound Class-Specific Features by Mutual Information Analysis , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[14]  C Darne,et al.  Phorbol ester causes ligand-independent activation of the androgen receptor. , 1998, European journal of biochemistry.

[15]  K. Umesono,et al.  The nuclear receptor superfamily: The second decade , 1995, Cell.

[16]  A. Hill,et al.  The possible effects of the aggregation of the molecules of haemoglobin on its dissociation curves , 1910 .

[17]  Nathaniel D. Heintzman,et al.  Histone modifications at human enhancers reflect global cell-type-specific gene expression , 2009, Nature.

[18]  Johan Svensson,et al.  Stimulation of both estrogen and androgen receptors maintains skeletal muscle mass in gonadectomized male mice but mainly via different pathways. , 2010, Journal of molecular endocrinology.

[19]  R. Conolly,et al.  Nonmonotonic dose-response relationships: mechanistic basis, kinetic modeling, and implications for risk assessment. , 2004, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[20]  Tenreiro Machado,et al.  Shannon Entropy Analysis of the Genome Code , 2012 .

[21]  R. Somogyi,et al.  The application of shannon entropy in the identification of putative drug targets. , 2000, Bio Systems.

[22]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[23]  Xiaowei Zhang,et al.  Classification of chemicals based on concentration-dependent toxicological data using ToxClust. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[24]  Shyamal D Peddada,et al.  Accounting for Uncertainty in Heteroscedasticity in Nonlinear Regression. , 2012, Journal of statistical planning and inference.

[25]  B. Katzenellenbogen,et al.  Nongenotropic, Sex-Nonspecific Signaling through the Estrogen or Androgen Receptors Dissociation from Transcriptional Activity , 2001, Cell.

[26]  Adam Yasgar,et al.  Quantitative high-throughput screening: a titration-based approach that efficiently identifies biological activities in large chemical libraries. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Indranil Chakrabarty,et al.  Boltzmann-Shannon entropy: Generalization and application , 2006 .

[28]  Robert Nadon,et al.  Statistical practice in high-throughput screening data analysis , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[29]  Ruili Huang,et al.  Dose-Response Modeling of High-Throughput Screening Data , 2009, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[30]  Tom Fawcett,et al.  An introduction to ROC analysis , 2006, Pattern Recognit. Lett..