Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
SLAS Discov ; 26(9): 1212-1224, 2021 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34543136

RESUMO

A proteolysis-targeting chimera (PROTAC) is a new technology that marks proteins for degradation in a highly specific manner. During screening, PROTAC compounds are tested in concentration-response (CR) assays to determine their potency, and parameters such as the half-maximal degradation concentration (DC50) are estimated from the fitted CR curves. These parameters are used to rank compounds, with lower DC50 values indicating greater potency. However, PROTAC data often exhibit biphasic and polyphasic relationships, making standard sigmoidal CR models inappropriate. A common solution includes manual omitting of points (the so-called masking step), allowing standard models to be used on the reduced data sets. Due to its manual and subjective nature, masking becomes a costly and nonreproducible procedure. We therefore used a Bayesian changepoint Gaussian processes model that can flexibly fit both nonsigmoidal and sigmoidal CR curves without user input. Parameters such as the DC50, maximum effect Dmax, and point of departure (PoD) are estimated from the fitted curves. We then rank compounds based on one or more parameters and propagate the parameter uncertainty into the rankings, enabling us to confidently state if one compound is better than another. Hence, we used a flexible and automated procedure for PROTAC screening experiments. By minimizing subjective decisions, our approach reduces time and cost and ensures reproducibility of the compound-ranking procedure. The code and data are provided on GitHub (https://github.com/elizavetasemenova/gp_concentration_response).


Assuntos
Modelos Teóricos , Proteínas/química , Proteólise , Proteínas/metabolismo
2.
EClinicalMedicine ; 39: 101064, 2021 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34401689

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Since its emergence in Autumn 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern (VOC) B.1.1.7 (WHO label Alpha) rapidly became the dominant lineage across much of Europe. Simultaneously, several other VOCs were identified globally. Unlike B.1.1.7, some of these VOCs possess mutations thought to confer partial immune escape. Understanding when and how these additional VOCs pose a threat in settings where B.1.1.7 is currently dominant is vital. METHODS: We examine trends in the prevalence of non-B.1.1.7 lineages in London and other English regions using passive-case detection PCR data, cross-sectional community infection surveys, genomic surveillance, and wastewater monitoring. The study period spans from 31st January 2021 to 15th May 2021. FINDINGS: Across data sources, the percentage of non-B.1.1.7 variants has been increasing since late March 2021. This increase was initially driven by a variety of lineages with immune escape. From mid-April, B.1.617.2 (WHO label Delta) spread rapidly, becoming the dominant variant in England by late May. INTERPRETATION: The outcome of competition between variants depends on a wide range of factors such as intrinsic transmissibility, evasion of prior immunity, demographic specificities and interactions with non-pharmaceutical interventions. The presence and rise of non-B.1.1.7 variants in March likely was driven by importations and some community transmission. There was competition between non-B.1.17 variants which resulted in B.1.617.2 becoming dominant in April and May with considerable community transmission. Our results underscore that early detection of new variants requires a diverse array of data sources in community surveillance. Continued real-time information on the highly dynamic composition and trajectory of different SARS-CoV-2 lineages is essential to future control efforts. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, DeepMind, EPSRC, EA Funds programme, Open Philanthropy, Academy of Medical Sciences Bill,Melinda Gates Foundation, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, The Novo Nordisk Foundation, MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Community Jameel, Cancer Research UK, Imperial College COVID-19 Research Fund, Medical Research Council, Wellcome Sanger Institute.

3.
Chem Res Toxicol ; 33(1): 239-248, 2020 01 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31535850

RESUMO

Drug induced liver injury (DILI) can require significant risk management in drug development and on occasion can cause morbidity or mortality, leading to drug attrition. Optimizing candidates preclinically can minimize hepatotoxicity risk, but it is difficult to predict due to multiple etiologies encompassing DILI, often with multifactorial and overlapping mechanisms. In addition to epidemiological risk factors, physicochemical properties, dose, disposition, lipophilicity, and hepatic metabolic function are also relevant for DILI risk. Better human-relevant, predictive models are required to improve hepatotoxicity risk assessment in drug discovery. Our hypothesis is that integrating mechanistically relevant hepatic safety assays with Bayesian machine learning will improve hepatic safety risk prediction. We present a quantitative and mechanistic risk assessment for candidate nomination using data from in vitro assays (hepatic spheroids, BSEP, mitochondrial toxicity, and bioactivation), together with physicochemical (cLogP) and exposure (Cmaxtotal) variables from a chemically diverse compound set (33 no/low-, 40 medium-, and 23 high-severity DILI compounds). The Bayesian model predicts the continuous underlying DILI severity and uses a data-driven prior distribution over the parameters to prevent overfitting. The model quantifies the probability that a compound falls into either no/low-, medium-, or high-severity categories, with a balanced accuracy of 63% on held-out samples, and a continuous prediction of DILI severity along with uncertainty in the prediction. For a binary yes/no DILI prediction, the model has a balanced accuracy of 86%, a sensitivity of 87%, a specificity of 85%, a positive predictive value of 92%, and a negative predictive value of 78%. Combining physiologically relevant assays, improved alignment with FDA recommendations, and optimal statistical integration of assay data leads to improved DILI risk prediction.


Assuntos
Doença Hepática Induzida por Substâncias e Drogas , Membro 11 da Subfamília B de Transportadores de Cassetes de Ligação de ATP/antagonistas & inibidores , Teorema de Bayes , Sobrevivência Celular , Desenvolvimento de Medicamentos/métodos , Células Hep G2 , Humanos , Aprendizado de Máquina , Mitocôndrias/efeitos dos fármacos , Medição de Risco/métodos , Células THP-1
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA