Dataset Information

COVID-19 Knowledge Extractor (COKE): A Tool and a Web Portal to Extract Drug - Target Protein Associations from the CORD-19 Corpus of Scientific Publications on COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed a widespread effort to identify drug candidates and biological targets of relevance to SARS-COV-2 infection, which resulted in large numbers of publications on this subject. We have built the COVID-19 Knowledge Extractor (COKE), a web application to extract, curate, and annotate essential drug-target relationships from the research literature on COVID-19 to assist drug repurposing efforts. Materials and Methods: SciBiteAI ontological tagging of the COVID Open Research Dataset (CORD-19), a repository of COVID-19 scientific publications, was employed to identify drug-target relationships. Entity identifiers were resolved through lookup routines using UniProt and DrugBank. A custom algorithm was used to identify co-occurrences of protein and drug terms, and confidence scores were calculated for each entity pair. Results: COKE processing of the current CORD-19 database identified about 3,000 drug-protein pairs, including 29 unique proteins and 500 investigational, experimental, and approved drugs. Some of these drugs are presently undergoing clinical trials for COVID-19. Discussion: The rapidly evolving situation concerning the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a dramatic growth of publications on this subject in a short period. These circumstances call for methods that can condense the literature into the key concepts and relationships necessary for insights into SARS-CoV-2 drug repurposing. Conclusion: The COKE repository and web application deliver key drug - target protein relationships to researchers studying SARS-CoV-2. COKE portal may provide comprehensive and critical information on studies concerning drug repurposing against COVID-19. COKE is freely available at https://coke.mml.unc.edu/ and the code is available at https://github.com/DnlRKorn/CoKE.

SUBMITTER: Korn D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7709174 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has spread at an alarming speed, and effective treatment for the disease is still lacking. The body of evidence on COVID-19 has been increasing at an impressive pace, creating the need for a method to rapidly assess the current knowledge and identify key information. Gold standard methods such as systematic reviews and meta-analyses are regarded unsuitable because they have a narrow scope and are very time consuming.ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore the published scientific literature on COVID-19 and map the research evolution during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe performed a PubMed search to analyze the titles, keywords, and abstracts of published papers on COVID-19. We used latent Dirichlet allocation modeling to extract topics and conducted a trend analysis to understand the temporal changes in research for each topic, journal impact factor (JIF), and geographic origin.ResultsBased on our search, we identified 16,670 relevant articles dated between February 14, 2020, and June 1, 2020. Of these, 6 articles were reports from peer-reviewed randomized trials on patients with COVID-19. We identified 14 main research topics, of which the most common topics were health care responses (2812/16,670, 16.86%) and clinical manifestations (1828/16,670, 10.91%). We found an increasing trend for research on clinical manifestations and protective measures and a decreasing trend for research on disease transmission, epidemiology, health care response, and radiology. Publications on protective measures, immunology, and clinical manifestations were associated with the highest JIF. The overall median JIF was 3.7 (IQR 2.6-5.9), and we found that the JIF for these publications declined over time. The top countries producing research were the United States, China, Italy, and the United Kingdom.ConclusionsIn less than 6 months since the novel coronavirus was first detected, a remarkably high number of research articles on COVID-19 have been published. Here, we discuss and present the temporal changes in the available COVID-19 research during the early phase of the pandemic. Our findings may aid researchers and policy makers to form a structured view of the current COVID-19 evidence base and provide further research directions.

Project description:In addition to its primary regulatory role, the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is engaged in many forms of scientific authorship. During the period of 2010 to 2018, FDA oncology staff contributed to 356 publications in the scientific literature. Here, we collaborated with analysts in the Office of Program Planning, Analysis, and Evaluation at the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health (NIH), to present a series of analyses aimed at quantifying the characteristics and potential impact of these contributions, as well as characterizing the areas of work addressed. We found that FDA oncology papers are enriched for high-impact publications and have about two times the number of citations as an average NIH-funded paper. Further impact of the publications was measured based on the presence of 65 publications that were cited by guidelines and 12 publications cited by publicly listed clinical trials. The results seen here are promising in determining the impact of FDA oncology publication work but prompt further investigation into longer-term impacts, such as the influence of this work on other regulatory activities at FDA. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article describes the first comprehensive study of scientific publications produced by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oncology staff. The analysis illustrates that staff are highly engaged in publishing in the scientific literature in addition to completing regulatory review work. Publications are generally in clinical medicine, consistent with the large number of medical oncologists working at the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products (OHOP). OHOP publications generally focus either on communicating important regulatory work (approval summaries) or highlighting regulatory science issues to encourage dialogue with the scientific community (commentaries, reviews, and expert working papers). The analysis also suggests that several FDA oncology publications may influence clinical guidelines, but further work is needed to evaluate impact.

Dataset Information

COVID-19 Knowledge Extractor (COKE): A Tool and a Web Portal to Extract Drug - Target Protein Associations from the CORD-19 Corpus of Scientific Publications on COVID-19.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure