PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12767140

OptDesign: extending optimizable k-dissimilarity selection to combinatorial library design.

Abstract

Optimizable k-dissimilarity (OptiSim) selection entails drawing a series of subsamples of size k from a population and choosing the "best" candidate from each such subsample for inclusion in the selection set. By varying the size of the subsample, one can control the balance between representativeness and diversity in the selection set obtained. In the original formulation, a uniform random sampling from among valid candidates was used to draw the subsamples from a single target population. Here we describe in detail two key modifications that serve to extend the OptiSim methodology to vector selection for interdependent variables, specifically as applied to the design of combinatorial sublibraries. The first modification involves pivoting between variables: subsamples are drawn from each reagent pool in turn, with the viability of each candidate being evaluated in isolation as well as in terms of the products it will produce from complementary reagents already selected. The filters applied may be static or dynamic in nature, with molecular weight and hydrophobicity being examples of the former and structural diversity with respect to reagents already selected being an example of the latter. The second key modification is adding the ability to bias the selection of candidate reagents for inclusion in the subsamples. Taken together, these modifications support the efficient generation of multiblock and other sparse matrix designs that are both representative and diverse, and for which "backfilling" of designs edited to remove undesirable reagents or products is straightforward. The method is intrinsically fast and efficient, since enumeration of the full combinatorial is not required- only those candidates actually considered for inclusion need be evaluated. Moreover, because the subsample selection step is separate from the diversity-based selection of the "best" candidate, incorporating such bias in favor of a competing criterion such as low price provides a "natural," nonparametric mechanism for generating designs that are likely to be "good" in a double-objective, Pareto sense.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert D Clark, Julia Kar, Lakshmi Akella, Farhad Soltanshahi. OptDesign: extending optimizable k-dissimilarity selection to combinatorial library design.. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci025662h

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗