Abstract

The ability to computationally predict whether a compound treats a disease would improve the economy and success rate of drug approval. This study describes Project Rephetio to systematically model drug efficacy based on 755 existing treatments. First, we constructed Hetionet (neo4j.het.io), an integrative network encoding knowledge from millions of biomedical studies. Hetionet v1.0 consists of 47,031 nodes of 11 types and 2,250,197 relationships of 24 types. Data was integrated from 29 public resources to connect compounds, diseases, genes, anatomies, pathways, biological processes, molecular functions, cellular components, pharmacologic classes, side effects, and symptoms. Next, we identified network patterns that distinguish treatments from non-treatments. Then we predicted the probability of treatment for 209,168 compound-disease pairs (het.io/repurpose). Our predictions validated on two external sets of treatment and provided pharmacological insights on epilepsy, suggesting they will help prioritize drug repurposing candidates. This study was entirely open and received realtime feedback from 40 community members.

Data availability

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Daniel Scott Himmelstein

    Program in Biological and Medical Informatics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3012-7446
  2. Antoine Lizee

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Christine Hessler

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Leo Brueggeman

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sabrina L Chen

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Dexter Hadley

    Department of Pediatrics, Institute for Computational Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Ari Green

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Pouya Khankhanian

    Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Sergio E Baranzini

    Program in Biological and Medical Informatics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    sergio.baranzini@ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0067-194X

Funding

National Science Foundation (1144247)

  • Daniel Scott Himmelstein

Heidrich Family and Friends Foundation

  • Sergio E Baranzini

National Institutes of Health (5R01NS088155)

  • Sergio E Baranzini

National Cancer Institute (UH2CA203792)

  • Dexter Hadley

U.S. National Library of Medicine (1U01LM012675)

  • Dexter Hadley

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2017, Himmelstein et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 16,514
    views
  • 2,063
    downloads
  • 293
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Daniel Scott Himmelstein
  2. Antoine Lizee
  3. Christine Hessler
  4. Leo Brueggeman
  5. Sabrina L Chen
  6. Dexter Hadley
  7. Ari Green
  8. Pouya Khankhanian
  9. Sergio E Baranzini
(2017)
Systematic integration of biomedical knowledge prioritizes drugs for repurposing
eLife 6:e26726.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26726

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26726

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    Matthew Millard, David W Franklin, Walter Herzog
    Research Article

    The force developed by actively lengthened muscle depends on different structures across different scales of lengthening. For small perturbations, the active response of muscle is well captured by a linear-time-invariant (LTI) system: a stiff spring in parallel with a light damper. The force response of muscle to longer stretches is better represented by a compliant spring that can fix its end when activated. Experimental work has shown that the stiffness and damping (impedance) of muscle in response to small perturbations is of fundamental importance to motor learning and mechanical stability, while the huge forces developed during long active stretches are critical for simulating and predicting injury. Outside of motor learning and injury, muscle is actively lengthened as a part of nearly all terrestrial locomotion. Despite the functional importance of impedance and active lengthening, no single muscle model has all these mechanical properties. In this work, we present the viscoelastic-crossbridge active-titin (VEXAT) model that can replicate the response of muscle to length changes great and small. To evaluate the VEXAT model, we compare its response to biological muscle by simulating experiments that measure the impedance of muscle, and the forces developed during long active stretches. In addition, we have also compared the responses of the VEXAT model to a popular Hill-type muscle model. The VEXAT model more accurately captures the impedance of biological muscle and its responses to long active stretches than a Hill-type model and can still reproduce the force-velocity and force-length relations of muscle. While the comparison between the VEXAT model and biological muscle is favorable, there are some phenomena that can be improved: the low frequency phase response of the model, and a mechanism to support passive force enhancement.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Kara Schmidlin, Sam Apodaca ... Kerry Geiler-Samerotte
    Research Article

    There is growing interest in designing multidrug therapies that leverage tradeoffs to combat resistance. Tradeoffs are common in evolution and occur when, for example, resistance to one drug results in sensitivity to another. Major questions remain about the extent to which tradeoffs are reliable, specifically, whether the mutants that provide resistance to a given drug all suffer similar tradeoffs. This question is difficult because the drug-resistant mutants observed in the clinic, and even those evolved in controlled laboratory settings, are often biased towards those that provide large fitness benefits. Thus, the mutations (and mechanisms) that provide drug resistance may be more diverse than current data suggests. Here, we perform evolution experiments utilizing lineage-tracking to capture a fuller spectrum of mutations that give yeast cells a fitness advantage in fluconazole, a common antifungal drug. We then quantify fitness tradeoffs for each of 774 evolved mutants across 12 environments, finding these mutants group into classes with characteristically different tradeoffs. Their unique tradeoffs may imply that each group of mutants affects fitness through different underlying mechanisms. Some of the groupings we find are surprising. For example, we find some mutants that resist single drugs do not resist their combination, while others do. And some mutants to the same gene have different tradeoffs than others. These findings, on one hand, demonstrate the difficulty in relying on consistent or intuitive tradeoffs when designing multidrug treatments. On the other hand, by demonstrating that hundreds of adaptive mutations can be reduced to a few groups with characteristic tradeoffs, our findings may yet empower multidrug strategies that leverage tradeoffs to combat resistance. More generally speaking, by grouping mutants that likely affect fitness through similar underlying mechanisms, our work guides efforts to map the phenotypic effects of mutation.