In silico approaches to explore toxicity end points: Issues and concerns for estimating human health effects

Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism and Toxicology

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 125-134

  Matthews, Edwin J ^a   Contrera, Joseph F ^a  

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

Author keywords

Computational toxicology; Human health effect; Predictive modeling; Quantitative structure activity relationships; Weight of evidence

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; BIOASSAY; BIOSTATISTICS; CARCINOGENICITY; CARDIOTOXICITY; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; COMPUTER MODEL; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COST; DATA BASE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DOSE CALCULATION; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG SCREENING; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH HAZARD; HUMAN; IMMUNOTOXICITY; LIVER TOXICITY; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE; NEPHROTOXICITY; NONHUMAN; POSTMARKETING SURVEILLANCE; QUALITY CONTROL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REPRODUCTIVE TOXICITY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TERATOGENICITY; TOXICITY TESTING; ANIMAL; ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; METHODOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLIC HEALTH; STANDARD;

ANIMALIA;

DRUG;

ANIMAL TESTING ALTERNATIVES; ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GUIDELINES; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; PUBLIC HEALTH; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 34250318200     PISSN: 17425255     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1517/17425255.3.1.125     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. MATTHEWS EJ, BENZ RD, CONTRERA JF: Use of toxicological information in drug design. J. Molec. Graphics Modeling (2000) 18:605-614.
2. MATTHEWS EJ, CONTRERA JF: A new highly specific method for predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals using enhanced MCASE-ES software. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (1998) 28:242-264.
3. MATTHEWS EJ, KRUHLAK NL, CIMINO MC, BENZ RD, CONTRERA JF: An analysis of genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and carcinogenicity data: I. Identification of carcinogens using surrogate categories. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (2006) 44:83-96.
4. MATTHEWS EJ, KRUHLAK NL, CIMINO MC, BENZ RD, CONTRERA JF: Analysis of genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and carcinogenicity data: II. Identification of genotoxicants, reprotoxicants, and carcinogens using in silico methods. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (2006) 44:97-110.
5. VAN DER JAGT K, MUNN S, TØRSLØV J, DE BRU J: Alternative approaches can reduce the use of test animals under REACH. Report of the Institute for Health and Consumer Protection (IHCP). (2003):1-31.
6. DIRECTORATE-GENERAL, ENTERPRISE AND INDUSTRY, AND DIRECTORATE-GENERAL, ENVIRONMENT: Consultation document concerning registration, evaluation, authorisation and restrictions of chemicals (REACH) (2003).
7. DIRECTORATE-GENERAL, ENTERPRISE AND INDUSTRY, AND DIRECTORATE-GENERAL, ENVIRONMENT Commission communication on number of substances impacted by the REACH legislation (2003).
8. 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 series on testing and assessment No. XX. Draft (May 2006).
9. OECD: Guidance document on the validation of (quantitative) structure-activity relationship [Q)SAR] models. OECD environment health and safety publications series on testing and assessment No. XX. Draft (May 2006).
10. OECD: (Q)SAR application toolbox. DRAFT documents on discussion points, progress report, and work plan (May 2006).
11. DEARDEN JC, BARRATT MD, BENIGNI R et al.: The development and validation of expert systems for predicting toxicity. The report and recommendations of an ECVAM/ECB workshop 24. ATLA (1997) 25:223-252.
12. NETZEVA TI, WORTH AP, ALDENBER T et al.: Current status of methods for defining the applicability domain of (quantitative) structure-activity relationships. The report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 52. ATLA (2005) 33:155-173.
13. CONTRERA JF, JACOBS AC, DEGEORGE JJ: Carcinogenicity testing and the evaluation of regulatory requirements for pharmaceuticals. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (1997) 25:130-145.
14. CONTRERA JF, MATTHEWS EJ, BENZ RD: Predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using molecular structural similarity and E-stare indices. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (2003) 38:243-259.
15. CONTRERA JF, MACLAUGHLIN P, HALL LH, KIER LB: QSAR modeling of carcinogenic risk using discriminant analysis and topological molecular descriptors. Curr. Drug Discov. Technol. (2005) 2:55-67.
16. KIRKLAND D, AARDEMA M, HENDERSON L, MÜLLER L: Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro tests to discriminate carcinogens and non-carcinogens. I. Sensitivity, specificity, and relative preclictivity. Mutat. Res. (2005) 584:1-256.
17. HASEMAN JK, WINBUSH JS, O'DONNELL MW: The use of dual negative control groups to estimate false-positive rates in laboratory animal carcinogenicity studies. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. (1986) 7:573-584.
18. MATTHEWS EJ, BENZ RD, KRUHLAK NL, CONTRERA JF: A comprehensive model for reproductive and developmental toxicity hazard identification: I. Development of a weight of evidence QSAR database. Reg. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (2007) (In Press).
19. MATTHEWS EJ, KRUHLAK NL, BENZ RD, IVANOV J, KLOPMAN G, CONTRERA JF: A comprehensive model for reproductive and developmental toxicity hazard Identification: II. Construction of QSAR models to predict activides of untested chemicals. Reg. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (2006) (In Press).
20. MATTHEWS EJ, KRUHLAK NL, WEAVER JL, BENZ RD, CONTRERA JF: Assessment of the health effects of chemicals in humans: II Construction of an adverse effects database f6r QSAR modeling. Curr. Drug Discov. Technol. (2004) 1:243-254.
21. MATTHEWS EJ, KRUHLAK NL, BENZ RD, CONTRERA JF: 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. Tech. (2004) 1:61-76.
22. CONTRERA JF, MATTHEWS EJ, KRUHLAK NL, BENZ RD: Estimating the safe starting dose in Phase I clinical trials and no observed effect level based on QSAR modeling of the human maximum recommended daily dose. Reg. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (2004) 40:185-206.
23. KRUHLAK NL, CONTRERA JF, BENZ RD, MATTHEWS EJ: Progress in QSAR toxicity screening of pharmaceutical impurities and other FDA regulated products. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. (2007) (In Press).
24. KLOPMAN G: Multicase: a hierarchical computer automated structure evaluation program. QSAR (1992) 11:176-184.
25. CONTRERA JF, MATTHEWS EJ, KRUHLAK NL, BENZ RD: In silico screening of chemicals for bacterial mutagenicity using electrotopological E-state indices and MDL-QSAR software. Reg. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (2005) 43:313-323.
26. KIER LB, HALL LH: In: Molecular structure description: the electrotopological state. Lemont B (Ed.), Academic Press, New York, USA (1999).
27. NIEMELÄ JR, VINGGAARD M, WEDEBYE EB, JENSEN GE: QSAR model for antiandrogenic effect project group. Presentation at the: OECD Ad Hoc Workgroup Meeting. Stresa, Italy (2006).
28. ZEEMAN M, AUER CM, CLEMENTS RG, NABHOLZ JV, BOETHLING RS: USUS EPA regulatory perspectives on the use of (Q)SAR for new and existing chemical evaluations. SAR QSAR Environ. Res. (1995) 3:179-201.