Evaluating the utility of brightfield image data for mechanism of action prediction.
Journal
PLoS computational biology
ISSN: 1553-7358
Titre abrégé: PLoS Comput Biol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101238922
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2023
07 2023
Historique:
received:
27
12
2022
accepted:
02
07
2023
revised:
04
08
2023
medline:
7
8
2023
pubmed:
25
7
2023
entrez:
25
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Fluorescence staining techniques, such as Cell Painting, together with fluorescence microscopy have proven invaluable for visualizing and quantifying the effects that drugs and other perturbations have on cultured cells. However, fluorescence microscopy is expensive, time-consuming, labor-intensive, and the stains applied can be cytotoxic, interfering with the activity under study. The simplest form of microscopy, brightfield microscopy, lacks these downsides, but the images produced have low contrast and the cellular compartments are difficult to discern. Nevertheless, by harnessing deep learning, these brightfield images may still be sufficient for various predictive purposes. In this study, we compared the predictive performance of models trained on fluorescence images to those trained on brightfield images for predicting the mechanism of action (MoA) of different drugs. We also extracted CellProfiler features from the fluorescence images and used them to benchmark the performance. Overall, we found comparable and largely correlated predictive performance for the two imaging modalities. This is promising for future studies of MoAs in time-lapse experiments for which using fluorescence images is problematic. Explorations based on explainable AI techniques also provided valuable insights regarding compounds that were better predicted by one modality over the other.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37490493
doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1011323
pii: PCOMPBIOL-D-22-01901
pmc: PMC10403126
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1011323Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Harrison et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Photochem Photobiol Sci. 2010 Dec;9(12):1634-9
pubmed: 20931137
Nature. 2015 May 28;521(7553):436-44
pubmed: 26017442
Mol Biol Cell. 2016 Jan 15;27(2):219-22
pubmed: 26768859
Elife. 2017 Mar 18;6:
pubmed: 28315521
Sci Rep. 2017 Sep 29;7(1):12454
pubmed: 28963483
Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2016 Jun;39:134-142
pubmed: 27089218
Sci Rep. 2022 Jun 15;12(1):10001
pubmed: 35705591
NPJ Syst Biol Appl. 2021 Jul 21;7(1):31
pubmed: 34290253
Nat Methods. 2017 Aug 31;14(9):849-863
pubmed: 28858338
Genome Biol. 2006;7(10):R100
pubmed: 17076895
J Chem Inf Model. 2019 Mar 25;59(3):1163-1171
pubmed: 30840449
Nat Protoc. 2016 Sep;11(9):1757-74
pubmed: 27560178
RSC Chem Biol. 2021 Dec 22;3(2):170-200
pubmed: 35360890
J Biomol Screen. 2012 Feb;17(2):266-74
pubmed: 21956170
Nat Med. 2012 Jun;18(6):934-42
pubmed: 22561686
ACS Chem Biol. 2022 Jul 15;17(7):1733-1744
pubmed: 35793809
Cell. 2018 Apr 19;173(3):792-803.e19
pubmed: 29656897
Oncogene. 2018 May;37(18):2351-2366
pubmed: 29429989
BMC Genomics. 2008 Oct 29;9:507
pubmed: 18959802
Cytometry A. 2019 Apr;95(4):366-380
pubmed: 30565841
Anal Chem. 2019 Nov 5;91(21):14093-14100
pubmed: 31601098
PLoS One. 2021 Oct 15;16(10):e0258546
pubmed: 34653209
Sci Rep. 2022 Oct 7;12(1):16884
pubmed: 36207347
SLAS Discov. 2019 Apr;24(4):466-475
pubmed: 30641024
IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2019 Sep;23(5):2091-2098
pubmed: 30387753
Cytometry A. 2017 Feb;91(2):115-125
pubmed: 27434125
Cell Chem Biol. 2021 Mar 18;28(3):300-319
pubmed: 33740434