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 non-specific 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 26457 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 70855 compounds. In addition, we also apply a novel machine learning model (the 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.
Hydrogen Sulfide in Pharmacotherapy, Beyond the Hydrogen Sulfide-Donors
