Progress in QSAR toxicity screening of pharmaceutical impurities and other FDA regulated products

Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 43-55

  Kruhlak, Naomi L ^a   Contrera, Joseph F ^a   Benz, R Daniel ^a   Matthews, Edwin J ^a  

^a CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Carcinogenicity; Drug development; Genotoxicity; In silico screening; OECD principles; Predictive toxicology

Indexed keywords

CARCINOGENICITY; DEGRADENTS; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; GENOTOXICITY; PREDICTIVE TOXICOLOGY; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP (QSAR) MODELS;

BIOASSAY; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; COST EFFECTIVENESS; DRUG PRODUCTS; MATERIALS TESTING; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXICITY;

IMPURITIES;

ANESTHETIC AGENT; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ADVERSE OUTCOME; CARCINOGENICITY; CASE STUDY; COMPUTER MODEL; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DRUG CONTROL; DRUG DEGRADATION; DRUG IMPURITY; DRUG QUALITY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG SYNTHESIS; EXPERT SYSTEM; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; GENOTOXICITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MUTAGENICITY; NONHUMAN; OPTIMAL DRUG DOSE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RECOMMENDED DRUG DOSE; REVIEW; RODENT; TOXICOLOGY; UNITED STATES; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ANIMALS; DRUG CONTAMINATION; DRUG TOXICITY; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; SOFTWARE; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 33846820291     PISSN: 0169409X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2006.10.008     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. US Food and Drug Administration. International Conference on Harmonisation. Guidance for Industry. Q3A(R) Impurities in New Drug Products (2003), (http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/4164fnl.doc).
2. US Food and Drug Administration. International Conference on Harmonisation. Guidance for Industry. Q3B(R) Impurities in New Drug Products (2003), (http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/5528fnl.pdf).
3. US Food and Drug Administration. International Conference on Harmonisation. Guidance for Industry. Q3C Impurities: Residual Solvents (2003), (http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/Q3Cfnl.pdf).
4. European Medicines Agency. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Guideline on the Limits of Genotoxic Impurities (2004). CHMP/SWP/5199/02, (http://www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/human/swp/519902en.pdf).
5. PhRMA Genotoxic Impurity Task Force. Draft White Paper: Establishment of Allowable Concentration of Genotoxic Impurities in Drug Substances and Products (2004)
6. Drug Information Association. Regulation and Control of Genotoxic Impurities (November 17-18, 2005), Bethesda, Maryland
7. Ashby J., and Tennant R.W. Definitive relationships among chemical structure, carcinogenicity and mutagenicity for 301 chemicals tested by the U.S. NTP (National Toxicology Program). Mutat. Res. 257 (1991) 229-306
8. Contrera J.F., Matthews E.J., Kruhlak N.L., and Benz R.D. In silico screening of chemicals for bacterial mutagenicity using electrotopological E-state indices and MDL® QSAR software. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 43 (2005) 313-323
9. Matthews E.J., Kruhlak N.L., Cimino M.C., Benz R.D., and Contrera J.F. An analysis of genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and carcinogenicity data: II. Identification of genotoxicants and reprotoxicants using in silico methods. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 44 (2006) 97-110
10. Dearden J.C. In silico prediction of drug toxicity. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 17 (2003) 119-127
11. McGee P. Modeling success with in silico tools. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Dev. 8 (2005) 24-28
12. Wilson A.G., White A.C., and Mueller R.A. Role of predictive metabolism and toxicity modeling in drug discovery-a summary of some recent advancements. Curr. Opin. Drug Discov. Dev. 6 (2003) 123-128
13. Pearl G.M., Livingston-Carr S., and Durham S.K. Integration of computational analysis as a sentinel tool in toxicological assessments. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 1 (2001) 247-255
14. Tunkel J., Mayo K., Austin C., Hickerson A., and Howard P. Practical considerations on the use of predictive models for regulatory purposes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39 (2005) 2188-2199
15. Wagner P.M., Nabholz J.V., and Kent R.J. The new chemicals process at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): structure-activity relationships for hazard identification and risk assessment. Toxicol. Lett. 79 (1995) 67-73
16. US Food and Drug Administration. Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products (2004) 1-21. http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/whitepaper.html (http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/whitepaper.html)
17. OECD. Report on the regulatory uses and applications in OECD member countries of (quantitative) structure-activity relationship [(Q)SAR] models in the assessment of new and existing chemicals. OECD Environment, Health and Safety Publications, EHS Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 58, ENV/JM/MONO(2006)24, OECD Paris, France, 2006, (http://www.oecd.org/document/30/0,2340,en_2649_34365_1916638_1_1_1_1,00.html).
18. Jaworska J.S., Comber M., Auer C., and van Leeuwen C.J. Summary of a workshop on regulatory acceptance of (Q)SARs for human health and environmental endpoints. Environ. Health Persp. 111 (2003) 1358-1360
19. Eriksson L., Jaworska J., Worth A., Cronin M., McDowell R., and Gramatica P. Methods for reliability and uncertainty assessment and for applicability evaluation of classification- and regression-based (Q)SARs. Environ. Health Persp. 111 (2003) 1361-1375
20. Worth A.P., van Leeuwen C.J., and Hartung T. The prospects for using (Q)SARs in a changing political environment-high expectations and a key role for the European Commission's joint research centre. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 15 (2004) 331-344
21. OECD. Report from the Expert Group on (quantitative) structure-activity relationships [(Q)SARs] on the principles for the validation of (Q)SARs. OECD Environment, Health and Safety Publications, EHS Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 49, ENV/JM/MONO(2004)24, OECD, Paris, France, 2004, pp. 206. (http://www.oecd.org/document/30/0,2340,en_2649_34365_1916638_1_1_1_1,00.html).
22. Kier L.B., and Hall L.H. Molecular Structure Description: The Electrotopological State (1999), Academic Press, San Diego
23. Contrera J.F., Matthews E.J., and Benz R.D. Predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using molecular structural similarity and E-state indices. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 38 (2003) 243-259
24. Contrera J.F., Hall L.H., Kier L.B., and MacLaughlin P. QSAR modeling of carcinogenic risk using discriminant analysis and topological molecular descriptors. Curr. Drug Discov. Technol. 2 (2005) 55-57
25. Matthews E.J., and Contrera J.F. A new highly specific method for predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using enhanced MCASE-ES software. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 28 (1998) 242-264
26. Willett P. Chemical similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 38 (1998) 983-996
27. Tropsha A., Gramatica P., and Gombar V.K. The importance of being earnest: validation is the absolute essential for successful application and interpretation of QSPR models. Quant. Struct. -Act. Relat. 22 (2003) 1-9
28. Matthews E.J., Kruhlak N.L., Benz R.D., and Contrera J.F. Assessment of the health effects of chemicals in humans: I. QSAR estimation of the maximum recommended therapeutic dose (MRTD) and no effect level (NOEL) of organic chemicals based on clinical trial data. Curr. Drug Discov. Technol. 1 (2004) 61-76
29. Contrera J.F., Matthews E.J., Kruhlak N.L., and Benz R.D. Estimating the safe starting dose in phase I clinical trials and no observed effect level (NOEL) based on QSAR modeling of the human maximum recommended daily dose (MRDD). Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 40 (2004) 185-206
30. J.K. Selkirk, S.M. Soward (Eds.), Compendium of abstracts from long-term cancer studies reported by the National Toxicology Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences from 1976 to 1992. Environ. Health Perspect. Suppl. 101 (1993) 1-295. Additional data available at: http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/index.cfm?objectid=084801F0-F43F-7B74-0BE549908B5E5C1C.
31. World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. IARC, Lyon, France.
32. Gold L.S., Manley N.B., Slone T.H., Garfinkel G.B., Rohrback L., and Ames B.N. The fifth plot of the Carcinogenic Potency Database: results of animal bioassays published in the general literature through 1988 and by the National Toxicology Program through 1989. Environ. Health Perspect. 100 (1993) 65-168
33. Gold L.S., and Zeiger E. Handbook of Carcinogenic Potency and Genotoxicity Databases (1997), CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida
34. Cimino M.C., and Auletta A.E. Availability of the GENE-TOX database on the National Library of Medicine TOXNET system. Mutagenesis 8 (1993) 163-164
35. National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances - GENE-TOX Agent Registry. Online computer database - TOXNET file. U.S. Dept. Health and Human Services. Bethesda, Maryland, 2005. (http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen?GENETOX).
36. Matthews E.J., Kruhlak N.L., Cimino M.C., Benz R.D., and Contrera J.F. An analysis of genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and carcinogenicity data: I. Identification of carcinogens using surrogate endpoints. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 44 (2006) 83-96
37. N.W. Blacow (Ed.), Martindale: The Extra Pharmacopoeia, 26th edition. The Pharmaceutical Press, London, 1972. (b) A. Wade (Ed.), Martindale: The Extra Pharmacopoeia, 28th edition. The Pharmaceutical Press, London, 1982. (c) J.E.F. Reynolds (Ed.), Martindale: The Extra Pharmacopoeia, 30th edition, The Pharmaceutical Press, London, 1993.
38. R. Arky (Ed.), The Physicians' Desk Reference, 49th edition, Medical Economics Company, New Jersey, 1995. (b) R. Arky (Ed.), The Physicians' Desk Reference, 53rd edition, Medical Economics Company, New Jersey, 1999.
39. Lipinski C.A., Lombardo F., Dominy B.W., and Feeney P.J. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 46 (2001) 3-26
40. Snyder D.R., Pearl G.S., Mandakas G., Choy W.N., Goodsaid F., and Rosenblum I.Y. Assessment of the sensitivity of the computational programs DEREK, TOPKAT and MCASE in the prediction of the genotoxicity of pharmaceutical molecules. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 43 (2004) 143-158
41. Bailey A.B., Chanderbhan R., Collazo-Braier N., Cheeseman M.A., and Twaroski M.L. The use of structure-activity relationship analysis in the food contact notification program. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 42 (2005) 225-235