SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PPR

ProCyon: A multimodal foundation model for protein phenotypes

· 2024-12-15

DOI: 10.1101/2024.12.10.627665

Check source for accessPreprintOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Characterizing human proteins remains a major challenge: approximately 29% of human proteins lack experimentally validated functions and even well-annotated proteins often lack context-specific phenotypic insights. To enable universal modeling of protein phenotypes, we present P ro C yon , a multimodal foundation model that utilizes protein sequence, structure, and natural language for generating and predicting protein phenotypes across diverse knowledge domains. P ro C yon is trained on our novel dataset, P ro C yon -I nstruct , with 33 million protein phenotype instructions. On dozens of benchmarking tasks, P ro C yon performs competitively against single-modal and multimodal models. Further, P ro C yon conditionally retrieves proteins via mechanisms of action of small molecule drugs and disease contexts, and it generates candidate phenotypic descriptions for poorly characterized proteins, including those implicated in Parkinson’s disease that were identified after P ro C yon ’s knowledge cutoff date. We experimentally confirm P ro C yon ’s predictions in multiple sclerosis using post-mortem brain RNA-seq, identifying novel MS genes and elucidating associated pathway mechanisms consistent with cortical pathology. P ro C yon paves the way toward a general approach to generate functional insights into the human proteome.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.