Display options
Cite
Yadav B, Wennerberg K, Aittokallio T, et al. Searching for Drug Synergy in Complex Dose-Response Landscapes Using an Interaction Potency Model. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2015;13:504-13doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2015.09.001.
Yadav, B., Wennerberg, K., Aittokallio, T., & Tang, J. (2015). Searching for Drug Synergy in Complex Dose-Response Landscapes Using an Interaction Potency Model. Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 13504-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2015.09.001
Yadav, Bhagwan, et al. "Searching for Drug Synergy in Complex Dose-Response Landscapes Using an Interaction Potency Model." Computational and structural biotechnology journal vol. 13 (2015): 504-13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2015.09.001
Yadav B, Wennerberg K, Aittokallio T, Tang J. Searching for Drug Synergy in Complex Dose-Response Landscapes Using an Interaction Potency Model. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2015 Sep 25;13:504-13. doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2015.09.001. eCollection 2015. PMID: 26949479; PMCID: PMC4759128.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2015 Sep 25;13:504-13. doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2015.09.001. eCollection 2015.

Searching for Drug Synergy in Complex Dose-Response Landscapes Using an Interaction Potency Model.

Computational and structural biotechnology journal

Bhagwan Yadav, Krister Wennerberg, Tero Aittokallio, Jing Tang

Affiliations

  1. Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), FI-00014, University of Helsinki, Finland.

PMID: 26949479 PMCID: PMC4759128 DOI: 10.1016/j.csbj.2015.09.001

Abstract

Rational design of multi-targeted drug combinations is a promising strategy to tackle the drug resistance problem for many complex disorders. A drug combination is usually classified as synergistic or antagonistic, depending on the deviation of the observed combination response from the expected effect calculated based on a reference model of non-interaction. The existing reference models were proposed originally for low-throughput drug combination experiments, which make the model assumptions often incompatible with the complex drug interaction patterns across various dose pairs that are typically observed in large-scale dose-response matrix experiments. To address these limitations, we proposed a novel reference model, named zero interaction potency (ZIP), which captures the drug interaction relationships by comparing the change in the potency of the dose-response curves between individual drugs and their combinations. We utilized a delta score to quantify the deviation from the expectation of zero interaction, and proved that a delta score value of zero implies both probabilistic independence and dose additivity. Using data from a large-scale anticancer drug combination experiment, we demonstrated empirically how the ZIP scoring approach captures the experimentally confirmed drug synergy while keeping the false positive rate at a low level. Further, rather than relying on a single parameter to assess drug interaction, we proposed the use of an interaction landscape over the full dose-response matrix to identify and quantify synergistic and antagonistic dose regions. The interaction landscape offers an increased power to differentiate between various classes of drug combinations, and may therefore provide an improved means for understanding their mechanisms of action toward clinical translation.

Keywords: Dose–response matrix; Drug combination scoring; High-throughput screening; Interaction landscape

References

  1. J Biomol Screen. 2014 Jun;19(5):817-21 - PubMed
  2. J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17(3):461-80 - PubMed
  3. Arzneimittelforschung. 1953 Jun;3(6):285-90 - PubMed
  4. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2010 May;58(5):421-34 - PubMed
  5. N Engl J Med. 2013 Jul 4;369(1):32-42 - PubMed
  6. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012 Jul 24;12 (8):527-39 - PubMed
  7. Pharmacol Rev. 2006 Sep;58(3):621-81 - PubMed
  8. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Feb 11;111(6):2349-54 - PubMed
  9. Cell Rep. 2015 Apr 21;11(3):390-404 - PubMed
  10. Pharmacol Rev. 1995 Jun;47(2):331-85 - PubMed
  11. Mol Syst Biol. 2009;5:338 - PubMed
  12. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jun 24;100(13):7977-82 - PubMed
  13. Pharmacol Rev. 1989 Jun;41(2):93-141 - PubMed
  14. Cancer Res. 2010 Jan 15;70(2):440-6 - PubMed
  15. Nat Biotechnol. 2009 Jul;27(7):659-66 - PubMed
  16. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2006 Oct;319(1):1-7 - PubMed
  17. Nat Chem Biol. 2006 Sep;2(9):458-66 - PubMed
  18. N Engl J Med. 2012 Nov;367 (18):1694-703 - PubMed

Publication Types