QSAR models of the in vitro estrogen activity of bisphenol A analogs

QSAR and Combinatorial Science

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 78-88

  Coleman, Kelly P ^a   Toscano, William A ^a   Wiese, Thomas E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b TULANE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bisphenol A; Endocrine Disruption; Estrogen Receptor Binding

Indexed keywords

CELL PROLIFERATION; COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; CONSUMER PRODUCTS; ENDOCRINE DISRUPTERS; MOLECULAR GRAPHICS; PHENOLS;

BISPHENOL A; BISPHENOLS; BISPHENOLS-A; ENDOCRINE DISRUPTION; EPOXY; ESTROGEN ACTIVITY; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR BINDING; IN-VITRO; POLYCARBONATE RESINS; QSAR MODEL;

MONOMERS;

4,4' ISOPROPYLIDENEDIPHENOL; DIETHYLSTILBESTROL; ESTRADIOL; ESTROGEN; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR;

BIOASSAY; CELL PROLIFERATION; CONFERENCE PAPER; DRUG STRUCTURE; ESTROGEN ACTIVITY; FLUORESCENCE; GENE INDUCTION; HORMONE RECEPTOR INTERACTION; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MOLECULAR MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS;

EID: 0038006580     PISSN: 1611020X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/qsar.200390008     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. Schettler, T., Solomon, G., Valenti, M., and Huddle A., Generations at Risk, MIT Press, Cambridge 1999, pp. 151-188.
2. Committee on Hormonally Active Agents in the Environment, National Research Council, Hormonally Active Agents in the Environment, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 1999, pp. 10, 31, 32.
3. Guillette, L., Jr., and Crain, D. A., Environmental Endocrine Disruptors, Taylor and Francis, New York 2000, pp. 269 - 290.
4. McLachlan, J.A., Environmental signaling: what embryos and evolution teach us about endocrine disrupting chemicals, Endocr. Rev. 22 (3), 319 - 341 (2001).
5. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program: Report to Congress, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 2000, available from http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/oscpendo/ reporttocongress0800.pdf (accessed April 6, 2002).
6. Review of the EPA's Proposed Environmental Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board and Scientific Advisory Panel, Washington, D.C. 1999, EPA-SAB-EC-99-013, available from http://www.epa.gov/sab/ec13.pdf (accessed April 6, 2002).
7. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program; Establishment of an Endocrine Disruptor Methods Validation Subcommittee under the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology; Request for Nominations for Membership, Fed. Regist. 66 (88), 23022 - 23027 (2001).
8. Hileman, B., Testing Program Hits Snags: Assaying endocrine disruptors runs up against the complexity of hormonal communication, Chem. Eng. News 79 (31), 35 - 37 (2001).
9. Schultz, T. W., Sinks, G. D., and Cronin, M. T. D., Structure-activity relationships for gene activation oestrogenicity: evaluation of a diverse set of aromatic chemicals, Environ. Toxicol. 17, 14 - 23 (2002).
10. Gao, H., Williams, C., Labute, P., Bajorath, J., Binary quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) analysis of estrogen receptor ligands, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 39, 164 - 168 (1999).
11. Sadler, B. R., Cho, S. J., Ishaq, K. S., Chae, K., Korach, K. S., Three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship study of nonsteroidal estrogen receptor ligands using the comparative molecular field / cross-validated r2-guided region selection approach, J. Med. Chem. 41, 2261 - 2267 (1998).
12. Gao, H., Katzenellenbogen, J. A., Garg, R., Hansch, C., Comparative QSAR Analysis of Estrogen Receptor Ligands, Chem. Rev. 99 (3), 723 - 744 (1999).
13. Gray, L. E., Kelce, W. R., Wiese, T., Tyl, R., Gaido, K., Cook, J., Klinefelter, G., Desaulniers, D., Wilson, E., Zacharewski, T., Waller, C., Foster, P., Laskey, J., Reel, J., Giesy, J., Laws, S., McLachlan, J., Breslin, W., Cooper, R., Di Giulio, R., Johnson, R., Purdy, R., Mihaich, E., Safe, S., Sonnenschein, C., Welshons, W., Miller, R., McMaster, S., Colborn, T., Endocrine screening methods workshop report: Detection of estrogenic and androgenic hormonal and antihormonal activity for chemicals that act via receptor or steroidogenic enzyme mechanisms, Reprod. Toxicol. 11 (5), 719 - 750 (1997).
14. Bolger, R., Nestich, S., Wiese, T., Ervin, K., and Checovich, W., Rapid screening of environmental chemicals for estrogen receptor binding capacity, Environ. Health Perspect. 106(9), 551 - 557 (1998).
15. Shi, L. M., Fang, H., Tong, W., Wu, J., Perkins, R., Blair, R. M., Branham, W. S., Dial, S. L., Moland, C. L., Sheehan, D. M., QSAR models using a large diverse set of estrogens, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 41, 186 - 195 (2001).
16. Tong, W., Lowis, D. R., Perkins, R., Chen, Y, Welsh, W. J., Goddette, D. W., Heritage, T.W., Sheehan, D. M., Evaluation of quantitative structure-activity relationship methods for large-scale prediction of chemicals binding to the estrogen receptor, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 38, 669 - 677 (1998).
17. Blair, R. M., Fang, H., Branham, W. S., Hass, B.S., Dial, S. L., Moland, C. L., Tong, W., Shi, L., Perkins, R., Sheehan, D. M., The estrogen receptor relative binding affinities of 188 natural and xenochemicals: structural diversity of ligands, Toxicol. Sci. 54, 138 - 153 (2000).
18. Fang, H., Tong, W., Shi, L. M., Blair, R. Perkins, R., Branham, W., Hass, B. S., Xie, Q., Dial, S. L., Moland, C. L., Sheehan, D. M., Structure-activity relationships for a large diverse set of natural, synthetic, and environmental estrogens, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 14, 280 - 294 (2001).
19. QSAR Discovery Software, Tripos, Inc., St. Louis, MO, available from www.tripos.com/software/qsar.html (accessed April 6, 2002).
20. Klebe, G., Abraham, U., Mietzner, T., Molecular similarity indices in a comparative analysis (CoMSIA) of drug molecules to correlate and predict their biological activity, J. Med. Chem. 37(24), 4130 - 46 (1994).
21. Cramer, R. D., Patterson, D. E., Bunce, J. D., Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA). 1. Effect of shape on binding of steroids to carrier proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 110, 5959 - 5967 (1988).
22. Evans, R., The steroid and thyroid hormone receptor superfamily, Science 240, 889 - 894 (1988).
23. Parker, M. G., Arbuckle N., Dauvois S., Danelian P., and White R., Structure and function of the estrogen-receptor, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 684, 119 - 126 (1993).
24. Blair, R. M., Fang, H., Branham, W. S., Hass, B. S., Dial, S. L., Moland, C. L., Tong, W., Shi, L., Perkins, R., and Sheehan, D. M., The estrogen receptor relative binding affinities of 188 natural and xenochemicals: structural diversity of ligands, Toxicol. Sci. 54, 138 - 153 (2000).
25. Wiese, T. E. and Kelce W. R., An introduction to environmental estrogens, Chem. Ind. 18 August, 648 - 653 (1997).
26. Horwitz K. B, Jackson T. A., Bain D. L., Richer J. K., Takimoto G. S., and Tung L., Nuclear receptor coactivators and corepressors, Mol. Endocrinol. 10(10), 1167 - 1177 (1996).
27. Brzozowski, A. M., Pike, A. C. W., Dauter, Z., Hubbard, R. E., Bonn, T., Engstrom, O., Ohman, L., Greene, G. L., Gustafsson, J., and Carlquist, M., Molecular basis of agonism and antagonism in the oestrogen receptor, Nature 389, 753 -757 (1997).
28. Anstead, G. M., Carlson, K. E., and Katzenellenbogen, J. A., The estradiol pharmacophore: Ligand structure-estrogen receptor binding affinity relationships and a model for the receptor-binding site, Steroids 62, 268 - 303 (1997).
29. Ashby J., Odum J., Paton D., Lefevre P. A., Beresford N., and Sumpter J. P., Re-evaluation of the first synthetic estrogen, 1-keto-1, 2,3, 4-tetrahydrophenanthrene, and bisphenol A, using both the ovariectomised rat model used in 1933 and additional assays, Toxicol. Lett. 115 (3), 231 - 238 (2000).
30. Bisphenol A: A Known Endocrine Disruptor, World Wildlife Fund European Toxics Program, Surrey, UK 2000, available from http://www.panda.org/toxics/downloads/bisphenol.pdf (accessed April 6, 2002).
31. Sonnenschein C., and Soto A. M., An updated review of environmental estrogen and androgen mimics and antagonists, J. Steroid. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 65 (1-6), 143-150 (1998).
32. Pons M., Gagne D., Nicolas J. C., and Mehtali M., A new cellular model of response to estrogens: A bioluminescent test to characterize (anti) estrogen molecules, Biotechniques 9, 450 - 459 (1990).
33. Wiese, T. E., Kral, L. G., Dennis, K. E., Butler, W. B., and Brooks, S. C., Optimization of estrogen growth response in MCF-7 cells, In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. 28A(9 - 10), 595-602 (1992).
34. Wade, M. G., Desaulniers, D., Leingartner, K., and Foster, W. G., Interactions between endosulfan and dieldrin on estrogen-mediated processes in vitro and in vivo, Repro Toxicology 11, 791 - 798 (1997).
35. Halgren, T. A., Merck molecular force field. I. Basis, form, scope, parameterization and performance of MMFF94, J. Comp. Chem. 17, 490 - 519 (1996).
36. SYBYL Version 6.8, Tripos, Inc., St. Louis, MO, available from http://www.tripos.com/software/sybase.html (accessed May 22, 2002).
37. Octane2 Workstation, Silicon Graphics, Inc. Mountain View, CA, available from http://www.sgi.com/workstations/octane2/ (accessed May 22, 2002).
38. Kellog, G. E., Semus, S. E, and Abraham, D. J., HINT: A new method for empirical hydrophobic field calculation for CoMFA, J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 5, 545 - 552 (1991).
39. Cramer, R. D., Bunce J. D., Patterson, D. E., and Frank, I. E., Crossvalidation, bootstrapping, and partial least squares compared with multiple regression in conventional QSAR studies. Quant. Struct.-Act. Relat. 7, 18-25 (1988).
40. Tanenbaum, D. M., Wang, Y., Williams, S. P., and Sigler, P. B., Crystallographic comparison of the estrogen and progesterone receptor's ligand-binding domain. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 95, 5998 - 6003 (1998).