使用多酶遗传毒性数据库进行农药遗传毒性评估的OECD QSAR工具箱分析器的验证

IF 3.1 Q2 TOXICOLOGY
Monika Kemény , Colin M. North , Felix M. Kluxen , Markus Frericks , Dragana Vukelic , Sishuo Cao , Roustem Saiakhov , Mounika Girireddy
{"title":"使用多酶遗传毒性数据库进行农药遗传毒性评估的OECD QSAR工具箱分析器的验证","authors":"Monika Kemény ,&nbsp;Colin M. North ,&nbsp;Felix M. Kluxen ,&nbsp;Markus Frericks ,&nbsp;Dragana Vukelic ,&nbsp;Sishuo Cao ,&nbsp;Roustem Saiakhov ,&nbsp;Mounika Girireddy","doi":"10.1016/j.comtox.2025.100356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship (QSAR) models are widely used for genotoxicity assessment in regulatory settings. <em>In silico</em> profilers are a special case of models capturing mechanistic insights specific to a particular toxicological endpoint or reflecting chemistry-related attributes that may not be directly associated with a defined mechanism of toxicity. This study explores the accuracy of using such profilers as a lower tier in genotoxicity assessment to inform regulatory concerns. Relevant profilers in the OECD QSAR Toolbox are investigated using an external validation dataset derived from the MultiCASE Genotoxicity database, which contains AMES mutagenicity and in vivo micronucleus (MNT) experimental results. The MNT dataset includes the commercial in vivo MNT dataset expanded with pesticide data from regulatory documents. This analysis incorporates the use of metabolism simulations by the OECD QSAR Toolbox to assess their influence on profiler performance. The present findings show that the absence of profiler alerts correlates well with experimentally negative outcomes. However, the calculated accuracy for the MNT-related and AMES-related profilers varies considerably (41%-78% for MNT-related profilers and 62%-88% for AMES-related profilers using the full set with and without consideration of metabolism). Incorporating metabolism simulations increases accuracy by 4–6% for the full AMES-dataset, and 4–16% for the full MNT-dataset. Together, genotoxicity assessment using the Toolbox profilers should include a critical evaluation of any triggered alerts, considering the overall performance statistics of the profilers presented within this work. Results from third-party QSAR models provide critical insights to complement the expert review of any profiler positive result, as profilers alone are not recommended to be used directly for prediction purpose.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37651,"journal":{"name":"Computational Toxicology","volume":"34 ","pages":"Article 100356"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of OECD QSAR Toolbox profilers for genotoxicity assessment of pesticides using the MultiCase genotoxicity database\",\"authors\":\"Monika Kemény ,&nbsp;Colin M. North ,&nbsp;Felix M. Kluxen ,&nbsp;Markus Frericks ,&nbsp;Dragana Vukelic ,&nbsp;Sishuo Cao ,&nbsp;Roustem Saiakhov ,&nbsp;Mounika Girireddy\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.comtox.2025.100356\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship (QSAR) models are widely used for genotoxicity assessment in regulatory settings. <em>In silico</em> profilers are a special case of models capturing mechanistic insights specific to a particular toxicological endpoint or reflecting chemistry-related attributes that may not be directly associated with a defined mechanism of toxicity. This study explores the accuracy of using such profilers as a lower tier in genotoxicity assessment to inform regulatory concerns. Relevant profilers in the OECD QSAR Toolbox are investigated using an external validation dataset derived from the MultiCASE Genotoxicity database, which contains AMES mutagenicity and in vivo micronucleus (MNT) experimental results. The MNT dataset includes the commercial in vivo MNT dataset expanded with pesticide data from regulatory documents. This analysis incorporates the use of metabolism simulations by the OECD QSAR Toolbox to assess their influence on profiler performance. The present findings show that the absence of profiler alerts correlates well with experimentally negative outcomes. However, the calculated accuracy for the MNT-related and AMES-related profilers varies considerably (41%-78% for MNT-related profilers and 62%-88% for AMES-related profilers using the full set with and without consideration of metabolism). Incorporating metabolism simulations increases accuracy by 4–6% for the full AMES-dataset, and 4–16% for the full MNT-dataset. Together, genotoxicity assessment using the Toolbox profilers should include a critical evaluation of any triggered alerts, considering the overall performance statistics of the profilers presented within this work. Results from third-party QSAR models provide critical insights to complement the expert review of any profiler positive result, as profilers alone are not recommended to be used directly for prediction purpose.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37651,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computational Toxicology\",\"volume\":\"34 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100356\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computational Toxicology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468111325000167\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"TOXICOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computational Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468111325000167","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

定量构效关系(QSAR)模型被广泛用于遗传毒性评估。计算机分析器是一种特殊的模型,它捕获特定于特定毒理学终点的机制见解,或反映可能与定义的毒性机制不直接相关的化学相关属性。本研究探讨了在遗传毒性评估中使用这种分析器作为较低层次的准确性,以告知监管方面的关注。使用来自MultiCASE基因毒性数据库的外部验证数据集(其中包含AMES诱变性和体内微核(MNT)实验结果)对OECD QSAR工具箱中的相关分析进行了研究。MNT数据集包括商业体内MNT数据集,扩展了来自监管文件的农药数据。该分析结合了经合组织QSAR工具箱代谢模拟的使用,以评估其对分析器性能的影响。目前的研究结果表明,缺乏分析警报与实验阴性结果密切相关。然而,mnt相关的和ames相关的分析器的计算精度差别很大(mnt相关的分析器的计算精度为41%-78%,ames相关的分析器的计算精度为62%-88%)。结合代谢模拟可使完整mes数据集的准确性提高4-6%,完整mnt数据集的准确性提高4-16%。总之,考虑到本工作中提供的分析程序的总体性能统计数据,使用工具箱分析程序的遗传毒性评估应包括对任何触发警报的关键评估。来自第三方QSAR模型的结果提供了重要的见解,以补充任何分析器阳性结果的专家审查,因为不建议单独使用分析器直接用于预测目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validation of OECD QSAR Toolbox profilers for genotoxicity assessment of pesticides using the MultiCase genotoxicity database
Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship (QSAR) models are widely used for genotoxicity assessment in regulatory settings. In silico profilers are a special case of models capturing mechanistic insights specific to a particular toxicological endpoint or reflecting chemistry-related attributes that may not be directly associated with a defined mechanism of toxicity. This study explores the accuracy of using such profilers as a lower tier in genotoxicity assessment to inform regulatory concerns. Relevant profilers in the OECD QSAR Toolbox are investigated using an external validation dataset derived from the MultiCASE Genotoxicity database, which contains AMES mutagenicity and in vivo micronucleus (MNT) experimental results. The MNT dataset includes the commercial in vivo MNT dataset expanded with pesticide data from regulatory documents. This analysis incorporates the use of metabolism simulations by the OECD QSAR Toolbox to assess their influence on profiler performance. The present findings show that the absence of profiler alerts correlates well with experimentally negative outcomes. However, the calculated accuracy for the MNT-related and AMES-related profilers varies considerably (41%-78% for MNT-related profilers and 62%-88% for AMES-related profilers using the full set with and without consideration of metabolism). Incorporating metabolism simulations increases accuracy by 4–6% for the full AMES-dataset, and 4–16% for the full MNT-dataset. Together, genotoxicity assessment using the Toolbox profilers should include a critical evaluation of any triggered alerts, considering the overall performance statistics of the profilers presented within this work. Results from third-party QSAR models provide critical insights to complement the expert review of any profiler positive result, as profilers alone are not recommended to be used directly for prediction purpose.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Computational Toxicology
Computational Toxicology Computer Science-Computer Science Applications
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: Computational Toxicology is an international journal publishing computational approaches that assist in the toxicological evaluation of new and existing chemical substances assisting in their safety assessment. -All effects relating to human health and environmental toxicity and fate -Prediction of toxicity, metabolism, fate and physico-chemical properties -The development of models from read-across, (Q)SARs, PBPK, QIVIVE, Multi-Scale Models -Big Data in toxicology: integration, management, analysis -Implementation of models through AOPs, IATA, TTC -Regulatory acceptance of models: evaluation, verification and validation -From metals, to small organic molecules to nanoparticles -Pharmaceuticals, pesticides, foods, cosmetics, fine chemicals -Bringing together the views of industry, regulators, academia, NGOs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信