Hierarchical Rules for Read-Across and in Silico Models of Mutagenicity

Journal of Environmental Science and Health - Part C Environmental Carcinogenesis and Ecotoxicology Reviews

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 385-403

  Benfenati, Emilio ^a   Manganelli, Serena ^a   Giordano, Sabrina ^a   Raitano, Giuseppa ^a   Manganaro, Alberto ^a  

^a MARIO NEGRI INSTITUTE FOR PHARMACOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (Italy)

Author keywords

mutagenicity; REACH regulation; read Across; structural alerts

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS;

CHEMICAL CLASS; IN-SILICO MODELS; MUTAGENICITY; REACH REGULATION; READ-ACROSS; SET OF RULES; STRUCTURAL ALERTS; TARGET COMPOUND;

INDICATORS (CHEMICAL);

MODEL; MUTAGENICITY; ALGORITHM; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MUTATION; SOFTWARE;

MUTAGENIC AGENT;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MUTAGENS; MUTATION; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84948758405     PISSN: 10590501     EISSN: 15324095     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10590501.2015.1096881     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Ashby J. Fundamental structural alerts to potential carcinogenicity or noncarcinogenicity. Environ Mutagen. 1985; 7: 919-21.
2. Ashby J., Tennant RW. Chemical structure, Salmonella mutagenicity and extent of carcinogenicity as indicators of genotoxic carcinogenesis among 222 chemicals tested in rodents by the US NCI/NTP. Mutat Res. 1988; 204: 17-115.
3. Benigni R., Bossa C. Structural alerts of mutagens and carcinogens. Curr. Comput.-Aided Drug Des. 2006; 2: 169-76.
4. International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). M7, I., Assessment and Control of DNA Reactive (Mutagenic) Impurities in Pharmaceuticals to Limit Potential Carcinogenicity Risk, 2014, ICH, Geneva, Switzerland.
5. European Medicines Agency. Questions and Answers on the "Guideline on the limits for genotoxic impurities," EMA/CHMP/SWP/431994/2007, 23rd September 2010 revision 3, Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), Safety Working Party (SWP).
6. Benigni R., Bossa C., Jeliazkova N., Netzeva T., Worth A. Benigni/Bossa rulebase for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity-A module of Toxtree. JRC Scientific and Technical Reports; European Commission report EUR 23241; 2008.
7. Marchant CA., Briggs KA., Long A. In silico tools for sharing data and knowledge on toxicity and metabolism: Derek for windows, Meteor, and Vitic. Toxicol Mech Method. 2008; 18: 177-87.
8. Kazius J., McGuire R., Bursi R. Derivation and validation of toxicophores for mutagenicity prediction. J Med Chem. 2005; 48: 312-20.
9. Ferrari T., Cattaneo D., Gini G., Golbamaki BakhtyariN., Manganaro A., Benfenati E. Automatic knowledge extraction from chemical structures: the case of mutagenicity prediction. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2013; 24: 365-83.
10. Klopman G. MULTICASE 1. A hierarchical computer automated structure evaluation program. Quant Struct Activity Relationships. 1992; 11: 76-184.
11. Klopman G., Rosenkranz HS. Prediction of carcinogenicity/mutagenicity using MULTICASE. Mutation Res. 1994; 305: 33-46.
12. Ahlberg E., Carlsson L., Boyer S. Computational derivation of structural alerts from large toxicology data sets. J Chem Inf Model. 2014; 54: 2945-52.
13. Enoch SJ., Cronin MT. Development of new structural alerts suitable for chemical category formation for assigning covalent and non-covalent mechanisms relevant to DNA binding. Mutat Res. 2012; 743: 10-9.
14. Benigni R., Bossa C. Mechanisms of chemical carcinogenicity and mutagenicity: a review with implications for predictive toxicology. Chem Rev. 2011; 111: 2507-36.
15. Hansen K., Mika S., Schroeter T., Sutter A., ter Laak A., Steger-Hartmann T., Heinrich N., Müller KR. Benchmark data set for in silico prediction of Ames mutagenicity. J Chem Inf Model. 2009; 49 (9): 2077-81.
16. Alternative non-testing methods assessed for REACH substances. ANTARES; 2011. http://www.antares-life.eu.
17. SMILES-A Simplified Chemical Language. http://www.daylight.com/dayhtml/doc/theory/theory.smiles.html.
18. Chemical Carcinogenesis Research Information System. NCRI informatics Initiative Homepage; 2009. http://www.cancerinformatics.org.uk/matrix/CCRIS.htm.
19. Helma C., Cramer T., Kramer S., Raedt LD. Data mining and machine learning techniques for the identification of mutagenicity inducing substructures and structure activity relationships of noncongeneric compounds. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2004; 44: 1402-11.
20. Kazius J., McGuire R., Bursi R. Derivation and validation of toxicophores for mutagenicity prediction. J Med Chem. 2005; 48: 312-20.
21. Feng J., Lurati L., Ouyang H., Robinson T., Wang Y., Yuan S., Young SS. Predictive toxicology: benchmarking molecular descriptors and statistical methods. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2003; 43: 1463-70.
22. Judson PN., Cooke PA., Doerrer NG., Greene N., Hanzlik RP., Hardy C.,. Hartmann A, Hinchliffe D, Holder J, Müller L, Steger-Hartmann T, Rothfuss A, Smith M, Thomas K, Vessey JD, Zeiger E. Towards the creation of an international toxicology information centre. Toxicology. 2005; 213: 117-28.
23. Genetic Toxicity, Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity, and Carcinogenicity Database; 2009. http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/CDER/ucm092217.htm.
24. Cassano A., Raitano G., Mombelli E., Fernández A., Cester J., Roncaglioni A., Benfenati E. Evaluation of QSAR models for the prediction of Ames genotoxicity: a retrospective exercise on the chemical substances registered under the EU REACH Regulation. J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev. 2014; 32: 273-98.
25. SMARTS-A Language for Describing Molecular Patterns. http://www.daylight.com/dayhtml/doc/theory/theory.smarts.htm.
26. istMolBase is available from Kode, http://chm.kode-solutions.net.
27. VEGA (Virtual evaluation of chemical properties and toxicity) is a platform for QSAR. http://www.vega-qsar.eu/.
28. The Chemistry Development Kit, a scientific library for chemoinformatics written in Java. http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/cdk/.
29. toxRead. http://www.toxgate.eu/.
30. Gini G., Franchi AM., Manganaro A., Golbamaki A., Benfenati E. ToxRead: a tool to assist in read-Across and its use to assess mutagenicity of chemicals. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2014; 25: 999-1011.
31. Benigni R., Giuliani A. Computer-Assisted analysis of interlaboratory Ames test variability. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1988; 25: 135-48.
32. Kamber M., Flückiger-Isler S., Engelhardt G., Jaeckh R., Zeiger E. Comparison of the Ames II and traditional Ames test responses with respect to mutagenicity, strain specificities, need for metabolism and correlation with rodent carcinogenicity. Mutagen. 2009; 24: 359-66.
33. Piegorsch WW., Zeiger E. Measuring intra-Assay agreement for the Ames salmonella assay. In: L Hotorn, ed. Statistical Methods in Toxicology. Lecture Notes in Medical Informatics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1991; 33: 35-41.
34. Watanabe K., Sakamoto K., Sasaki T. 2638 Mutagen. 1995; 10: 235-41.
35. Sushko I., Novotarskyi S., Körner R., Pandey AK., Cherkasov A., Li J., Gramatica P, Hansen K, Schroeter T, Müller KR, Xi L, Liu H, Yao X, Öberg T, Hormozdiari F, Dao P, Sahinalp C, Todeschini R, Polishchuk P, Artemenko A, Kuz'min V, Martin TM, Young DM, Fourches D, Muratov E, Tropsha A, Baskin I, Horvath D, Marcou G, Muller C, Varnek A, Prokopenko VV, Tetko IV. Applicability domains for classification problems: benchmarking of distance to models for Ames mutagenicity set. J Chem Inf Model. 2010; 50: 2094-111.