Target Fishing: A Single-Label or Multi-Label Problem?
  According to Cobanoglu et al and Murphy, it is now widely acknowledged that
the single target paradigm (one protein or target, one disease, one drug) that
has been the dominant premise in drug development in the recent past is
untenable. More often than not, a drug-like compound (ligand) can be
promiscuous - that is, it can interact with more than one target protein. In
recent years, in in silico target prediction methods the promiscuity issue has
been approached computationally in different ways. In this study we confine
attention to the so-called ligand-based target prediction machine learning
approaches, commonly referred to as target-fishing. With a few exceptions, the
target-fishing approaches that are currently ubiquitous in cheminformatics
literature can be essentially viewed as single-label multi-classification
schemes; these approaches inherently bank on the single target paradigm
assumption that a ligand can home in on one specific target. In order to
address the ligand promiscuity issue, one might be able to cast target-fishing
as a multi-label multi-class classification problem. For illustrative and
comparison purposes, single-label and multi-label Naive Bayes classification
models (denoted here by SMM and MMM, respectively) for target-fishing were
implemented. The models were constructed and tested on 65,587 compounds and 308
targets retrieved from the ChEMBL17 database. SMM and MMM performed
differently: for 16,344 test compounds, the MMM model returned recall and
precision values of 0.8058 and 0.6622, respectively; the corresponding recall
and precision values yielded by the SMM model were 0.7805 and 0.7596,
respectively. However, at a significance level of 0.05 and one degree of
freedom McNemar test performed on the target prediction results returned by SMM
and MMM for the 16,344 test ligands gave a chi-squared value of 15.656, in
favour of the MMM approach.
