Skip to main content
Log in

Making priors a priority

  • Perspective
  • Published:
Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When we build a predictive model of a drug property we rigorously assess its predictive accuracy, but we are rarely able to address the most important question, “How useful will the model be in making a decision in a practical context?” To answer this requires an understanding of the prior probability distribution (“the prior”) and hence prevalence of negative outcomes due to the property being assessed. In this perspective, we illustrate the importance of the prior to assess the utility of a model in different contexts: to select or eliminate compounds, to prioritise compounds for further investigation using more expensive screens, or to combine models for different properties to select compounds with a balance of properties. In all three contexts, a better understanding of the prior probabilities of adverse events due to key factors will improve our ability to make good decisions in drug discovery, finding higher quality molecules more efficiently.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jaynes ET (2003) Probability theory: the logic of science: principles and elementary applications vol 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chadwick AT, Segall MD (2010) Overcoming psychological barriers to good discovery decisions. Drug Discovery Today 15:561–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Welch HG, Black WC (2010) Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 102:605–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. COMARE (2007) 12th Report The impact of personally initiated X-ray computed tomography scanning for the health assessment of asymptomatic individuals. Chairman: Professor A. Elliott. COMARE Secretariat, Didcot. http://www.comare.org.uk/documents/COMARE12thReport.pdf. Accessed 7 June 2010

  5. Di Masi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG (2003) The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J. Health Econ. 22:151–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Performance assessment: has DEREK been improved? http://www.aapspharmaceutica.com/meetings/files/36/Kreatsoulas.ppt#302,14. Accessed 12 Oct 2010

  7. Ekins S, Boulanger B, Swaan PW, Hupcey MA (2002) Towards a new age of virtual ADME/TOX and multidimensional drug discovery. J. Comp. Aided Mol Design 16:381–401

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Segall MD, Champness E, Obrezanova O, Leeding C (2009) Beyond profiling: using ADMET models to guide decisions. Chem. Biodiv. 6:2144–2151

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew Segall.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Segall, M., Chadwick, A. Making priors a priority. J Comput Aided Mol Des 24, 957–960 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-010-9388-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-010-9388-7

Keywords

Navigation