Research Article
Predicting drug–target interaction networks of human diseases based on multiple feature information
Published Online:5 Nov 2013https://doi.org/10.2217/pgs.13.162
Abstract
Aim: Drug–target interaction is crucial in the drug design process. Predicting the drug–target interaction networks of important human diseases can provide valuable clues for the characterization of the mechanism of action of diseases. Materials & methods: A new graph-based semisupervised learning (GBSSL) method is proposed to predict the drug–target interaction networks involved in 13 types of diseases. According to the method, each drug–target pair is initially described with different biological features including sequence, structure, function and network topology information. Then, the optimal feature selection procedures based on the relief and minimum redundancy maximum relevance are executed, respectively. Finally, unknown drug–target interactions can be predicted by the GBSSL method effectively. Results: The proposed method can effectively predict drug–target interactions (with a receiver operating characteristic score of 94.8% and a precision-recall score of 76.5%). Conclusion: Compared with the existing methods, the GBSSL method provides an efficient means of generating optimal features obtained from the combination of multiple sources of feature information.
Original submitted 22 April 2013; Revision submitted 14 August 2013.
References
- 1 DrewsJ. Drug discovery: a historical perspective. Science287,1960–1964 (2000).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 2 Imming P, Sinning C, Meyer A. Drugs, their targets and the nature and number of drug targets. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.5,821–834 (2006).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 3 Haggarty SJ, Koeller KM, Wong JC, Butcher RA, Schreiber SL. Multidimensional chemical genetic analysis of diversity oriented synthesis-derived deacetylase inhibitors using cell-based assays. Chem. Biol.10,383–396 (2003).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 4 Kuruvilla FG, Shamji AF, Sternson SM, Hergenrother PJ, Schreiber SL. Dissecting glucose signalling with diversity-oriented synthesis and small-molecule microarrays. Nature416,653–657 (2002).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 5 Cheng AC, Coleman RG, Smyth KT et al. Structure-based maximal affinity model predicts small molecule druggability. Nat. Biotechnol.25,71–75 (2007).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 6 Yang Y, Adelstein SJ, Kassis AITarget discovery from data mining approaches. Drug Discov. Today14,147–154 (2009).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 7 Xia Z, Wu LY, Zhou X, Wong ST. Semi-supervised drug–protein interaction prediction from heterogeneous biological spaces. BMC Syst. Biol.4,S6(2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 8 Chen H, Zhang Z. A semi-supervised method for drug–target interaction prediction with consistency in networks. PLoS ONE8(5),e62975(2013).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 9 Yamanishi Y, Araki M, Cutteridge A, Honda W, Kanehisa M. Prediction of drug–target interaction networks from the integration of chemical and genomic spaces. Bioinformatics24,i232–i240 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 10 Gönen M. Predicting drug–target interactions from chemical and genomic kernels using Bayesian matrix factorization. Bioinformatics28(18),2304–2310 (2012).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 11 Bleakley K, Yamanishi Y. Supervised prediction of drug–target interactions using bipartite local models. Bioinformatics25,2397–2403 (2009).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 12 Mei JP, Kwoh CK, Yang P, Li XL, Zheng J. Drug–target interaction prediction by learning from local information and neighbors. Bioinformatics29(2),238–245 (2013).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 13 Alaimo S, Pulvirenti A, Giugno R, Ferro A. Drug–target interaction prediction through domain-tuned network-based inference. Bioinformatics29(16),2004–2008 (2013).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 14 Cheng F, Liu C, Jiang J et al. Prediction of drug–target interactions and drug repositioning via network-based inference. PLoS Comput. Biol.8(5),e1002503 (2012).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 15 Wishart DS, Knox C, Guo AC et al. DrugBank: a knowledgebase for drugs, drug actions and drug targets. Nucleic Acids Res.36,D901–D906 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 16 Hamosh A, Scott AF, Amberger JS, Bocchini CA, McKusick VA. Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM), a knowledgebase of human genes and genetic disorders. Nucleic Acids Res.33,D514–D517 (2005).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 17 Jain E, Bairoch A, Duvaud S et al. Infrastructure for the life sciences: design and implementation of the UniProt website. BMC Bioinformatics10,136 (2009).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 18 Kanehisa M, Goto S, Hattori M et al. From genomics to chemical genomics: new developments in KEGG. Nucleic Acids Res.34,D354–D357 (2006).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 19 Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol.215,403–410 (1990).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 20 Hattori M, Okuno Y, Goto S, Kanehisa M. Development of a chemical structure comparison method for integrated analysis of chemical and genomic information in the metabolic pathways. J. Am. Chem. Soc.125,11853–11865 (2003).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 21 Hattori M, Okuno Y, Goto S, Kanehisa M. Heuristics for chemical compound matching. Genome Inform.14,144–155 (2003).Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 22 He Z, Zhang J, Shi XH et al. Predicting drug–target interaction networks based on functional groups and biological features. PLoS ONE5,e9603 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 23 Peng ZL, Yang JY, Chen X. An improved classification of G-protein-coupled receptors using sequence-derived features. BMC Bioinformatics11,420 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 24 Li ZR, Lin HH, Han LY, Jiang L, Chen X, Chen YZ. PROFEAT: a web server for computing structural and physicochemical features of proteins and peptides from amino acid sequence. Nucleic Acids Res.34,W32–W37 (2006).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 25 Tetko IV, Gasteiger J, Todeschini R et al. Virtual computational chemistry laboratory-design and description. J. Comput. Aid Mol. Des.19,453–463 (2005).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 26 Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat. Genet.25(1),25–29 (2000).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 27 Resnik P. Semantic similarity in a taxonomy: an information-based measure and its application to problems of ambiguity in natural language. J. Artif. Intell. Res.11,95–130 (1999).Crossref, Google Scholar
- 28 Ovaska K, Laakso M, Hautaniemi S. Fast gene ontology based clustering for microarray experiments. BioData Min.1,11(2008).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 29 Zhang Y, Ding D, Li T. Gene selection algorithm by combining reliefF and mRMR. BMC Genomics9,S27(2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 30 Robnik-Sikonja M, Kononenko I. Theoretical and empirical analysis of ReliefF and RReliefF. Mach. Learn.53,23–69 (2003).Crossref, Google Scholar
- 31 Saeys Y, Inza I, Larranaga P. A review of feature selection techniques in bioinformatics. Bioinformatics23,2507–2517 (2007).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 32 Peng H, Long F, Ding CFeature selection based on mutual information: criteria of max-dependency, max-relevance, and minredundancy. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell.27,1226–1238 (2005).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 33 Lee MC. Using support vector machine with a hybrid feature selection method to the stock trend prediction. Expert Syst. Appl.36(8),10896–10904 (2009).Crossref, Google Scholar
- 34 Widodo A, Yang BS. Application of nonlinear feature extraction and support vector machines for fault diagnosis of induction motors. Expert Syst. Appl.36(7),10266–10273 (2007).Google Scholar
- 35 Zhou D, Bousquet O, Lal TN, Weston J, Schölkopf B. Learning with local and global consistency. Advances in Neural Information Processing System16,321–328 (2004).Google Scholar
- 36 Xu Q, Hu QX, Xue H, Yu W, Yang Q. Semi-supervised protein subcellular localization. BMC Bioinformatics10,S47(2009).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 37 You ZH, Yin Z, Han K, Huang DS, Zhou X. A semi-supervised learning approach to predict synthetic genetic interactions by combining functional and topological properties of functional gene network. BMC Bioinformatics11,343 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 38 Gestel TV, Suykens JAK, Baesens B et al. Benchmarking least squares support vector machine classifiers. Mach. Learn.54(1),5–32 (2004).Crossref, Google Scholar
- 39 Yang Y, Wang YP, Li KB. MiRTif: a support vector machine-based microRNA target interaction filter. BMC Bioinformatics9,S4 (2008).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 40 Zhu X, Ghahramani Z, Lafferty J. Semi-supervised learning using Gaussian fields and harmonic functions. Proceedings of the 20th International Conference (ICML 2003), 912–919 (2003).Google Scholar
- 41 Chang CC, Lin CJ. LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol.2(3),27(2011).Crossref, Google Scholar
- 42 Smialowski P, Frishman D, Kramer S. Pitfalls of supervised feature selection. Bioinformatics26,440–443 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 43 Park SH, Goo JM, Jo CH. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve practical review for radiologists. Korean J. Radiol.5,11–18 (2004).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
- 44 Hopkins AL. Network pharmacology: the next paradigm in drug discovery. Nat. Chem. Biol.4,682–690 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
- 45 Vogt I, Mestres J. Drug-target networks. Mol. Inform.29,10–14 (2010).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
▪ Website
- 101 Prediction of drug–target interaction networks from the integration of chemical and genomic spaces. http://web.kuicr.kyoto-u.ac.jp//supp/yoshi/drugtargetGoogle Scholar
