Using quantitative structure-activity relationship modeling to quantitatively predict the developmental toxicity of halogenated azole compounds

Journal of Applied Toxicology

Volumn 34, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 787-794

  Craig, Evisabel A ^a,b   Wang, Nina Ching ^b   Zhao, Q Jay ^b  

^a OAK RIDGE INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND EDUCATION   (United States)

^b U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

Author keywords

Azoles; Developmental toxicity; Halogenated compounds; QSAR

Indexed keywords

ANILAZINE; CAPTAFOL; DICLOFENAC; ENILCONAZOLE; FLUAZIFOP; FLUBENDAZOLE; HALIDE; HEXACONAZOLE; IMIDACLOPRID; IPRODIONE; LINURON; MECOPROP; OXADIAZON; PACLOBUTRAZOL; PHOSALONE; PROCHLORAZ; PROPACHLOR; PROPICONAZOLE; PYRROLE; SUCRALOSE; TRIADIMEFON; TRIADIMENOL; PYRROLE DERIVATIVE;

ARTICLE; DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; ANIMAL; HUMAN; REPRODUCIBILITY; THEORETICAL MODEL; TOXICITY; TOXICITY TESTING;

ANIMALIA;

ANIMALS; AZOLES; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 84901616498     PISSN: 0260437X     EISSN: 10991263     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jat.2940     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Benfenati E, Diaza RG, Cassano A, Pardoe S, Gini G, Mays C, Knauf R, Benighaus L. 2011. The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives. Chem. Central J. 5: 58.
2. Cassano A, Manganaro A, Martin T, Young D, Piclin N, Pintore M, Bigoni D, Benfenati E. 2010. CAESAR models for developmental toxicity. Chem. Central J. 4(Suppl. 1): S4.
3. EPA US. 1991. Guidelines for developmental toxicity risk assessment. Fed. Reg. 56(234): 63798-63826.
4. EPA US. 2010. TSCA New Chemicals Program (NCP) Chemical Categories. http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/pubs/npcchemicalcategories.pdf
5. EPA US. 2013a. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). http://www.epa.gov/iris/
6. EPA US. 2013b. Human Health Benchmarks for Pesticides. http://iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticides/f?p=HHBP:HOME
7. EPA US. 2013c. Toxicity Reference Database (ToxRefDB). http://actor.epa.gov/toxrefdb/faces/Home.jsp
8. Golbraikh A, Tropsha A. 2002. Beware of q2! J. Mol. Grap. Model. 20(4): 269-276.
9. Hewitt M, Ellison CM, Enoch SJ, Madden JC, Cronin MT. 2010. Integrating (Q)SAR models, expert systems and read-across approaches for the prediction of developmental toxicity. Reprod. Toxicol. 30: 147-160.
10. Huggins J. 2003. Alternatives to animal testing: research, trends, validation, regulatory acceptance. Altex 20(Suppl 1): 3-61.
11. Hulzebos EM, Posthumus R. 2003. (Q)SARs: gatekeepers against risk on chemicals? SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 14(4): 285-316.
12. Judson R, Richard A, Dix DJ, Houck K, Martin M, Kavlock R, Dellarco V, Henry T, Holderman T, Sayre P, et al. 2009. The toxicity data landscape for environmental chemicals. Environ. Health Perspect. 117(5): 685-695.
13. Kahle M, Buerge IJ, Hauser A, Muller MD, Poiger T. 2008. Azole fungicides: occurrence and fate in wastewater and surface waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42(19): 7193-7200.
14. Knudsen TB, Kavlock RJ, Daston GP, Stedman D, Hixon M, Kim JH. 2011. Developmental toxicity testing for safety assessment: new approaches and technologies. Birth Defects Res. B Dev. Reprod. Toxicol. 92(5): 413-420.
15. Makris SL, Kim JH, Ellis A, Faber W, Harrouk W, Lewis JM, Paule MG, Seed J, Tassinari M, Tyl R. 2011. Current and future needs for developmental toxicity testing. Birth Defects Res. B Dev. Reprod. Toxicol. 92(5): 384-394.
16. Piparo EL, Worth A. 2010. Review of QSAR Models and SoftwareTools for predicting Developmental and Reproductive Toxicity. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports(ihcp.jrc.ec.europa.eu/our_labs/predictive_toxicology/doc/EUR_24522_EN.pdf).
17. Ruiz P, Begluitti G, Tincher T, Wheeler J, Mumtaz M. 2012. Prediction of acute mammalian toxicity using QSAR methods a case study of sulfur mustard and its breakdown products. Molecules 17(8): 8982-9001.
18. Sahigara F, Mansouri K, Ballabio D, Mauri A, Consonni V, Todeschini R. 2012. Comparison of different approaches to define the applicability domain of QSAR models. Molecules 17(5): 4791-4810.
19. Tropsha A. 2010. Best Practices for QSAR Model Development, Validation, and Exploitation. Mol. Inf. 29(6-7): 476-488.
20. Tropsha A, Golbraikh A. 2007. Predictive QSAR modeling workflow, model applicability domains, and virtual screening. Curr. Pharm Design 13(34): 3494-3504.
21. UK PAN. 2008. 30 most commonly found pesticides. http://www.pan-uk.org/food/30-most-commonly-found-pesticides
22. Wang NC, Jay Zhao Q, Wesselkamper SC, Lambert JC, Petersen D, Hess-Wilson JK. 2012. Application of computational toxicological approaches in human health risk assessment. I. A tiered surrogate approach. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 63: 10-19.