posted on 2021-12-08, 20:44authored byAndrés Sánchez-Ruiz, Gonzalo Colmenarejo
Positive outcomes in biochemical
and biological assays of food
compounds may appear due to the well-described capacity of some compounds
to form colloidal aggregates that adsorb proteins, resulting in their
denaturation and loss of function. This phenomenon can lead to wrongly
ascribing mechanisms of biological action for these compounds (false
positives) as the effect is nonspecific and promiscuous. Similar false
positives can show up due to chemical (photo)reactivity, redox cycling,
metal chelation, interferences with the assay technology, membrane
disruption, etc., which are more frequently observed when the tested
molecule has some definite interfering substructures. Although discarding
false positives can be achieved experimentally, it would be very useful
to have in advance a prognostic value for possible aggregation and/or
interference based only in the chemical structure of the compound
tested in order to be aware of possible issues, help in prioritization
of compounds to test, design of appropriate assays, etc. Previously,
we applied cheminformatic tools derived from the drug discovery field
to identify putative aggregators and interfering substructures in
a database of food compounds, the FooDB, comprising 26,457 molecules
at that time. Here, we provide an updated account of that analysis
based on a current, much-expanded version of the FooDB, comprising
a total of 70,855 compounds. In addition, we also apply a novel machine
learning model (SCAM Detective) to predict aggregators with 46–53%
increased accuracies over previous models. In this way, we expect
to provide the researchers in the mode of action of food compounds
with a much improved, robust, and widened set of putative aggregators
and interfering substructures of food compounds.