In silico toxicology: computational methods for the prediction of chemical toxicity

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 147-172

  Raies, Arwa B ^a   Bajic, Vladimir B ^a  

^a KING ABDULLAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Saudi Arabia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMALS; CHEMICALS; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; EXPERT SYSTEMS; FORECASTING;

CHEMICAL TOXICITY; COMPUTATIONAL TOOLS; ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS; GENERATING MODELS; PREDICTION MODEL; TOXICITY ASSESSMENT; TOXICITY ENDPOINTS; TOXICITY PREDICTIONS;

TOXICITY;

EID: 84987784636     PISSN: 17590876     EISSN: 17590884     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/wcms.1240     Document Type: Article

References (154)

1. Balls M, Combes RD, Bhogal N, eds. New Technologies for Toxicity Testing. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2012.
2. Davis A, Ward SE, eds. The Handbook of Medicinal Chemistry: Principles and Practice. Cambridge, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2015.
3. Dearden JC. In silico prediction of drug toxicity. J Comput Aided Mol Des 2003, 17:119–127.
4. Derelanko MJ, Auletta CS, eds. Handbook of Toxicology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2014.
5. Kapetanovic IM. Computer-aided drug discovery and development (CADDD): in silico-chemico-biological approach. Chem Biol Interact 2008, 171:165–176.
6. Marchant CA, Briggs KA, Long A. In silico tools for sharing data and knowledge on toxicity and metabolism: Derek Nexus, Meteor, and Vitic. Toxicol Mech Methods 2008, 18:177–187.
7. Matthews EJ, Kruhlak NL, Cimino MC, Benz RD, Contrera JF. An 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.
8. Merlot C. In silico methods for early toxicity assessment. Curr Opin Drug Discov Dev 2008, 11:80–85.
9. Pfannkuch F, Suter-Dick L, eds. Predictive Toxicology: From Vision to Reality. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA; 2015.
10. Salem H, Katz SA, eds. Alternative Toxicological Methods. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2003.
11. Terstappen GC, Reggiani A. In silico research in drug discovery. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2001, 22:23–26.
12. Vedani A, Dobler M, Lill MA. The challenge of predicting drug toxicity in silico. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 2006, 99:195–208.
13. Hvd W, Gifford E. ADMET in silico modelling: towards prediction paradise? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2003, 2:192–204.
14. Wilson AG, White AC, Mueller RA. Role of predictive metabolism and toxicity modeling in drug discovery – a summary of some recent advancements. Curr Opin Drug Discov Dev 2003, 6:123–128.
15. Xu JJ, Urban L, eds. Predictive Toxicology in Drug Safety. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2011.
16. Rowe PH. Statistical methods for continuous measured endpoints in in silico toxicology. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 228–251.
17. Rowe PH. Statistical methods for categorised endpoints in in silico toxicology. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 252–274.
18. AltTox. Toxicity testing overview. Available at: http://alttox.org/mapp/toxicity-testing-overview/. (Accessed May 5, 2015).
19. Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. What makes chemicals poisonous. Available at: http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/poisonou.html. (Accessed May 5, 2015).
20. Deeb O, Goodarzi M. In silico quantitative structure toxicity relationship of chemical compounds: some case studies. Curr Drug Saf 2012, 7:289–297.
21. Valerio LG Jr. In silico toxicology for the pharmaceutical sciences. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2009, 241:356–370.
22. Madan AK, Bajaj S, Dureja H. Classification models for safe drug molecules. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 99–124.
23. Zhu H. From QSAR to QSIIR: searching for enhanced computational toxicology models. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 53–65.
24. Benigni R, Battistelli CL, Bossa C, Colafranceschi M, Tcheremenskaia O. Mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, and other end points. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 67–98.
25. Toropov AA, Toropova AP, Raska I Jr, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J. Comprehension of drug toxicity: software and databases. Comput Biol Med 2014, 45:20–25.
26. Modi S, Hughes M, Garrow A, White A. The value of in silico chemistry in the safety assessment of chemicals in the consumer goods and pharmaceutical industries. Drug Discov Today 2012, 17:134–142.
27. Venkatapathy R, Wang NCY. Developmental toxicity prediction. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 305–340.
28. Jack J, Wambaugh J, Shah I. Systems toxicology from genes to organs. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 375–397.
29. Cannata N, Corradini F, Merelli E, Tesei L. Agent-based models of cellular systems. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 399–426.
30. Milan C, Schifanella O, Roncaglioni A, Benfenati E. Comparison and possible use of in silico tools for carcinogenicity within REACH legislation. J Environ Sci Health C Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev 2011, 29:300–323.
31. Cronin MTD. In silico tools for toxicity prediction. In: Wilson AGE, ed. New Horizons in Predictive Toxicology: Current Status and Application. Cambridge, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2011.
32. Worth AP, Lapenna S, Serafimova R. QSAR and metabolic assessment tools in the assessment of genotoxicity. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 125–162.
33. Guha R. On exploring structure–activity relationships. In: Kortagere S, ed. In Silico Models for Drug Discovery, vol. 993. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 81–94.
34. Devillers J. Methods for building QSARs. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 3–27.
35. Roncaglioni A, Toropov AA, Toropova AP, Benfenati E. In silico methods to predict drug toxicity. Curr Opin Pharmacol 2013, 13:802–806.
36. Lepailleur A, Poezevara G, Bureau R. Automated detection of structural alerts (chemical fragments) in (eco)toxicology. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 2013, 5:1–8.
37. Dupuis G, Benezra C. Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Simple Chemicals: A Molecular Approach. Marcel Dekker Inc: New York; 1982.
38. 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 U.S. NCI/NTP. Mutat Res 1988, 204:17–115.
39. Benigni R, Bossa C. Structure alerts for carcinogenicity, and the Salmonella assay system: a novel insight through the chemical relational databases technology. Mutat Res 2008, 659:248–261.
40. OECD. The OECD QSAR toolbox. 2015. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/risk-assessment/theoecdqsartoolbox.htm. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
41. Ideaconsult Ltd. Toxtree. 2013. Available at: http://eurl-ecvam.jrc.ec.europa.eu/laboratories-research/predictive_toxicology/qsar_tools/toxtree. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
42. Benigni R, Bossa C, Tcheremenskaia O. Nongenotoxic carcinogenicity of chemicals: mechanisms of action and early recognition through a new set of structural alerts. Chem Rev 2013, 113:2940–2957.
43. Hewitt M, Enoch S, Madden J, Przybylak K, Cronin M. Hepatotoxicity: a scheme for generating chemical categories for read-across, structural alerts and insights into mechanism(s) of action. Crit Rev Toxicol 2013, 43:537–558.
44. Gentile F, Chiatti L, Mauro F, Briganti G, Floridi A, Benassi M. Interaction of cytotoxic agents: a rule-based system for computer-assisted cell survival analysis. Anticancer Res 1992, 12:637–643.
45. Saliner A, Tsakovska I, Pavan M, Patlewicz G, Worth A. Evaluation of SARs for the prediction of skin irritation/corrosion potential: structural inclusion rules in the BfR decision support system. SAR QSAR Environ Res 2007, 18:331–342.
46. Tsakovska I, Saliner A, Netzeva T, Pavan M, Worth A. Evaluation of SARs for the prediction of eye irritation/corrosion potential: structural inclusion rules in the BfR decision support system. SAR QSAR Environ Res 2007, 18:221–235.
47. Gerner I, Barratt M, Zinke S, Schlegel K, Schlede E. Development and prevalidation of a list of structure-activity relationship rules to be used in expert systems for prediction of the skin-sensitising properties of chemicals. Altern Lab Anim 2004, 32:487–509.
48. Woo YT, Lai DY. Oncologic: a mechanism based expert system for predicting the carcinogenic potential of chemicals. In: Helma C, ed. Predictive Toxicology - The Book. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2005.
49. Lhasa Limited. Derek Nexus. 2014. Available at: http://www.lhasalimited.org/products/derek-nexus.htm. (Accessed on August 3, 2015).
50. CompuDrug Ltd. HazardExpert Pro. 2013. Available at: http://www.compudrug.com/hazardexpertpro. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
51. Lhasa Limited. Meteor Nexus. 2014. Available at: http://www.lhasalimited.org/products/meteor-nexus.htm. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
52. Klopman G. Artificial intelligence approach to structure-activity studies. computer automated structure evaluation of biological activity of organic molecules. J Am Chem Soc 1984, 106:7315–7321.
53. Poroikov VV, Filimonov DA, Borodina YV, Lagunin AA, Kos A. Robustness of biological activity spectra predicting by computer program PASS for noncongeneric sets of chemical compounds. J Chem Inf Model 2000, 40:1349–1355.
54. Cunningham AR, Moss ST, Iype SA, Qian G, Qamar S, Cunningham SL. Structure-activity relationship analysis of rat mammary carcinogens. Chem Res Toxicol 2008, 21:1970–1982.
55. Borgelt C, Berthold MR. Mining molecular fragments: finding relevant substructures of molecules. In: Kumar V, Tsurnoto S, Zhong N, Yu PS, Wu X, eds. IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Maebashi City, Japan. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2002, 51–58.
56. Yan X, Han J. gSpan: graph-based substructure pattern mining. In: Kumar V, Tsurnoto S, Zhong N, Yu PS, Wu X, eds. IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Maebashi City, Japan. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2002, 721–724.
57. Huan J, Wang W, Prins J. Efficient mining of frequent subgraph in the presence of isomorphism. In: Wu X, Tuzhilin A, eds. Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, Melbourne, FL. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society; 2003, 549–552.
58. Nijssen S, Kok JN. A Quickstart in frequent structure mining can make a Difference. In: Kohavi R, Gehrke J, DuMouchel W, Ghosh J, eds. Proceedings of the Tenth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Seattle, WA. New York, NY: ACM; 2004, 647–652.
59. Enoch SJ. Chemical category formation and read-across for the prediction of toxicity. In: Puzyn T, Leszczynski J, Cronin MT, eds. Recent Advances in QSAR Studies, vol. 8. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer; 2009, 209–219.
60. Jeliazkova N, Jaworska J, Worth AP. Open source tools for read-across and category formation. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 408–445.
61. OECD. Guidance on Grouping of Chemicals. 2nd ed. Paris, France: OECD; 2014.
62. Dimitrov S, Mekenyan O. An introduction to read-across for the prediction of the effects of chemicals. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 372–384.
63. Vink SR, Mikkers J, Bouwman T, Marquart H, Kroese ED. Use of read-across and tiered exposure assessment in risk assessment under REACH – a case study on a phase-in substance. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2010, 58:64–71.
64. Piparo EL, Maunz A, Helma C, Vorgrimmler D, Schilter B. Automated and reproducible read-across like models for predicting carcinogenic potency. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2014, 70:370–378.
65. Rorije E, Aldenberg T, Peijnenburg W. Read-across estimates of aquatic toxicity for selected fragrances. Altern Lab Anim 2013, 41:77–90.
66. Fabjan E, Hulzebos E, Mennes W, Piersma A. A category approach for reproductive effects of phthalates. Crit Rev Toxicol 2006, 36:695–726.
67. Enoch S, Cronin M, Schultz W, Madden J. Quantitative and mechanistic read across for predicting the skin sensitization potential of alkenes acting via Michael addition. Chem Res Toxicol 2008, 21:513–520.
68. Koleva Y, Madden J, Cronin M. Formation of categories from structure-activity relationships to allow read-across for risk assessment: toxicity of alpha,beta-unsaturated carbonyl compounds. Chem Res Toxicol 2008, 21:2300–2312.
69. Patlewicz G, Jeliazkova N, Saliner AG, Worth A. Toxmatch-a new software tool to aid in the development and evaluation of chemically similar groups. SAR QSAR Environ Res 2008, 19:397–412.
70. Ideaconsult Ltd. AMBIT. 2005. Available at: http://ambit.sourceforge.net/index.html. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
71. Ideaconsult Ltd. AMBIT discovery. 2005. Available at: http://ambit.sourceforge.net/download_ambitdiscovery.html. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
72. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). Analog identification methodology (AIM). 2013. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/sf/tools/aim.htm. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
73. Richard A, Yang C, Judson R. Toxicity data informatics: supporting a new paradigm for toxicity prediction. Toxicol Mech Methods 2008, 18:103–118.
74. U.S. National Library of Medicine. ChemIDplus. 2015. Available at: http://chem.sis.nlm.nih.gov/chemidplus/. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
75. El-Masri H. Modeling for regulatory purposes (risk and safety assessment). In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 297–303.
76. Bliss CI, Steven WL. The calculation of the time mortality curve. Ann Appl Biol 1937, 24:815–852.
77. Brown KG, Foureman GL. Concentration–time–response modeling for acute and short-term exposures. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2005, 43:45–54.
78. Miller FJ, Schlosser PM, Janszen DB. Haber's rule: a special case in a family of curves relating concentration and duration of exposure to a fixed level of response for a given endpoint. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2000, 149:21–34.
79. Bliss CI. The relation between exposure time, concentration and toxicity in experiments on insecticides. Ann Entomol Soc Am 1940, 33:721–766.
80. Bliss CI. The calculation of the dosage-mortality curve. Ann Appl Biol 1935, 22:134–167.
81. Waters M, Stasiewicz S, Merrick A, Tomer K, Bushel P, Paules R, Stegman N, Nehls G, Yost K, Johnson C, et al. CEBS—chemical effects in biological systems: a public data repository integrating study design and toxicity data with microarray and proteomics data. Nucleic Acids Res 2008, 36:D892–D900.
82. Bolton EE, Wang Y, Thiessen PA, Bryant SH. PubChem: integrated platform of small molecules and biological activities. In: Wheeler RA, Spellmeyer DC, eds. Annual Reports in Computational Chemistry, vol. 4. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier B.V.; 2008, 217–241.
83. Judson RS, Martin MT, Egeghy P, Gangwal S, Reif DM, Kothiya P, Wolf M, Cathey T, Transue T, Smith D, et al. Aggregating data for computational toxicology applications: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) aggregated computational toxicology resource (ACToR) system. Int J Mol Sci 2012, 13:1805–1831.
84. Appelt A, Bentzen S, Jakobsen A, Vogelius I. Dose–response of acute urinary toxicity of long-course preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. Acta Oncol 2015, 54:179–186.
85. Pottenger L, Schisler M, Zhang F, Bartels M, Fontaine D, McFadden L, Gollapudi BB. Dose–response and operational thresholds/NOAELs for in vitro mutagenic effects from DNA-reactive mutagens, MMS and MNU. Mutat Res 2009, 678:138–147.
86. Hunt D, Rai S, Li C. Summary of dose–response modeling for developmental toxicity studies. Dose Response 2008, 6:352–368.
87. Sung JH, Srinivasan B, Esch MB, McLamb WT, Bernabini C, Shuler ML, Hickman JJ. Using PBPK guided “Body-on-a-Chip” systems to predict mammalian response to drug and chemical exposure. Exp Biol Med 2014, 239:1225–1239.
88. Ingrisch M, Sourbron S. Tracer-kinetic modeling of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and CT: a primer. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 2013, 40:281–300.
89. Mager DE, Wyska E, Jusko WJ. Diversity of mechanism-based pharmacodynamic models. Drug Metab Dispos 2003, 31:510–519.
90. Andersen ME, Dennison JE. Mode of action and tissue dosimetry in current and future risk assessments. Sci Total Environ 2001, 274:3–14.
91. Crump KS, Chen C, Chiu WA, Louis TA, Portier CJ, Subramaniam RP, White PD. What role for biologically based dose–response models in estimating low-dose risk? Environ Health Perspect 2010, 118:585–588.
92. Haber LT, Maier A, Zhao Q, Dollarhide JS, Savage RE, Dourson ML. Applications of mechanistic data in risk assessment: the past, present, and future. Toxicol Sci 2001, 61:32–39.
93. Egorov AI, Dalbokova D, Krzyzanowski M. Biomonitoring-based environmental public health indicators. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 275–293.
94. Bois FY. Bayesian inference. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 597–636.
95. Avent ML, Vaska VL, Rogers BA, Cheng AC, van Hal SJ, Holmes NE, Howden BP, Paterson DL. Vancomycin therapeutics and monitoring: a contemporary approach. Intern Med J 2013, 43:110–119.
96. Certara. Phoenix WinNonlin. 2015. Available at: https://www.certara.com/products/pkpd/phx-wnl. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
97. Thermo Scientific. Kinetica. 2007. Available at: http://www.thermoscientific.com/content/tfs/en/product/kinetica-software-pk-pd-data-analysis-simulation-reporting.html. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
98. D'Argenio DZ, Schumitzky A, Wang X. ADAPT 5 user's guide: pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic systems analysis software. 2009. Available at: http://bmsr.usc.edu/software/adapt/. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
99. Chiu WA, White P. Steady-state solutions to PBPK models and their applications to risk assessment I: route-to-route extrapolation of volatile chemicals. Risk Anal 2006, 26:769–780.
100. Andersen M. Development of physiologically based pharmacokinetic and physiologically based pharmacodynamic models for applications in toxicology and risk assessment. Toxicol Lett 1995, 79:35–44.
101. Clewell HJ, Thomas RS, Gentry PR, Crump KS, Kenyon EM, El-Masri HA, Yager JW. Research toward the development of a biologically based dose response assessment for inorganic arsenic carcinogenicity: a progress report. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2007, 222:388–398.
102. Falk-Filipsson A, Hanberg A, Victorin K, Warholm M, Wallén M. Assessment factors – applications in health risk assessment of chemicals. Environ Res 2007, 104:108–127.
103. Martin OV, Martin S, Kortenkamp A. Dispelling urban myths about default uncertainty factors in chemical risk assessment – sufficient protection against mixture effects? Environ Health 2013, 12:53.
104. Hasegawa R, Hirata-Koizumi M, Dourson ML, Parker A, Sweeney LM, Nishikawa A, Yoshida M, Ono A, Hirose A. Proposal of new uncertainty factor application to derive tolerable daily intake. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2010, 58:237–242.
105. Guha R. The ups and downs of structure-activity landscapes. In: Bajorath J, ed. Chemoinformatics and Computational Chemical Biology, vol. 672. New York: Humana Press; 2011, 101–117.
106. Hansch C, Maloney PP, Fujita T, Muir RM. Correlation of biological activity of phenoxyacetic acids with hammett substituent constants and partition coefficients. Nature 1962, 194:178–180.
107. Gramatica P. On the development and validation of QSAR models. In: Reisfeld B, Mayeno AN, eds. Computational Toxicology, vol. 930. New York: Humana Press; 2013, 499–526.
108. Cronin MTD, Madden JC. Using in silico toxicity predictions: case studies for skin sensitisation. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 606–621.
109. Accelrys. TOPKAT (TOxicity Prediction by Komputer Assisted Technology). 2015. Available at: http://accelrys.com/products/discovery-studio/admet.html. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
110. IRCCS - Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, CRS4, KnowledgeMiner Software, Kemijski inštitut, Kode S.R.L., Politecnico di Milano, US EPA, UK FERA. VEGA. 2015. Available at: http://www.vega-qsar.eu/. (Accessed August 3, 2015).
111. Greene N, Judson PN, Langowski JJ, Marchant CA. Knowledge-based expert systems for toxicity and metabolism prediction: DEREK, StAR and METEOR. SAR QSAR Environ Res 1999, 10:299–314.
112. Weaver S, Gleeson MP. The importance of the domain of applicability in QSAR modeling. J Mol Graph Model 2008, 26:1315–1326.
113. Warheit DB. How meaningful are the results of nanotoxicity studies in the absence of adequate material characterization? Toxicol Sci 2008, 101:183–185.
114. Wani MY, Hashim MA, Nabi F, Malik MA. Nanotoxicity: dimensional and morphological concerns. Adv Phys Chem 2011, 2011:450912.
115. Winkler DA, Mombelli E, Pietroiusti A, Tran L, Worth A, Fadeel B, McCall MJ. Applying quantitative structure–activity relationship approaches to nanotoxicology: current status and future potential. Toxicology 2013, 313:15–23.
116. Beddoes CM, Case CP, Briscoe WH. Understanding nanoparticle cellular entry: a physicochemical perspective. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 2015, 218:48–68.
117. Zhang W, Yao Y, Sullivan N, Chen Y. Modeling the primary size effects of citrate-coated silver nanoparticles on their ion release kinetics. Environ Sci Technol 2011, 45:4422–4428.
118. Sizochenko N, Rasulev B, Gajewicz A, Kuz'min V, Puzyn T, Leszczynski J. From basic physics to mechanisms of toxicity: the “liquid drop” approach applied to develop predictive classification models for toxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. Nanoscale 2014, 6:13986–13993.
119. Fu PP, Xia Q, Hwang HM, Ray PC, Yu H. Mechanisms of nanotoxicity: generation of reactive oxygen species. J Food Drug Anal 2014, 22:64–75.
120. Gajewicz A, Cronin MTD, Rasulev B, Leszczynski J, Puzyn T. Novel approach for efficient predictions properties of large pool of nanomaterials based on limited set of species: nano-readacross. Nanotechnology 2015, 26:015701.
121. Li M, Reineke J. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling for nanoparticle toxicity study. In: Reineke J, ed. Nanotoxicity. Humana Press: New York; 2012, 369–382.
122. Silva T, Pokhrel LR, Dubey B, Tolaymat TM, Maier KJ, Liu X. Particle size, surface charge and concentration dependent ecotoxicity of three organo-coated silver nanoparticles: comparison between general linear model-predicted and observed toxicity. Sci Total Environ 2014, 468–469:968–976.
123. Ahmed L, Rasulev B, Turabekova M, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J. Receptor- and ligand-based study of fullerene analogs: comprehensive computational approach including quantum-chemical, QSAR and molecular docking simulations. Org Biomol Chem 2013, 11:5798–5808.
124. Pathakoti K, Huang MJ, Watts JD, He X, Hwang HM. Using experimental data of Escherichia coli to develop a QSAR model for predicting the photo-induced cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. J Photochem Photobiol B 2014, 130:234–240.
125. Puzyn T, Gajewicz A, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J. Nanomaterials – the next great challenge for QSAR modelers. In: Puzyn T, Leszczynski J, Cronin MT, eds. Recent Advances in QSAR Studies, vol. 8. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer; 2009, 209–219.
126. Henn BC, Coull BA, Wright RO. Chemical mixtures and children's health. Curr Opin Pediatr 2014, 26:223–229.
127. Løkke H, Ragas AMJ, Holmstrup M. Tools and perspectives for assessing chemical mixtures and multiple stressors. Toxicology 2013, 313:73–82.
128. Sarigiannis DA, Hansen U. Considering the cumulative risk of mixtures of chemicals – a challenge for policy makers. Environ Health 2012, 11:S18.
129. Bliss CI. The toxicity of poisons applied jointly. Ann Appl Biol 1939, 26:585–615.
130. Hadrup N, Taxvig C, Pedersen M, Nellemann C, Hass U, Vinggaard AM. Concentration addition, independent action and generalized concentration addition models for mixture effect prediction of sex hormone synthesis in vitro. PLoS One 2013, 8:e70490.
131. Howard GJ, Webster TF. Generalized concentration addition: a method for examining mixtures containing partial agonists. J Theor Biol 2009, 259:469–477.
132. Baas J, Jager T, Kooijman B. A review of DEB theory in assessing toxic effects of mixtures. Sci Total Environ 2010, 408:3740–3745.
133. Baas J, Jager T, Kooijman SA. A model to analyze effects of complex mixtures on survival. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 2009, 72:669–676.
134. Kortagere S, Ekins S. Troubleshooting computational methods in drug discovery. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 2010, 61:67–75.
135. Cronin MTD. Finding the data to develop and evaluate (Q)SARs and populate categories for toxicity prediction. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 31–58.
136. Nendza M, Aldenberg T, Benfenati E, Benigni R, Cronin MTD, Escher S, Fernandez A, Gabbert S, Giralt F, Hewitt M, et al. Data quality assessment for in silico methods: a survey of approaches and needs. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 59–117.
137. Cronin MTD, Schultz WT. Pitfalls in QSAR. J Mol Struc-Theochem 2003, 622:39–51.
138. Dimitrov S, Dimitrova G, Pavlov T, Dimitrova N, Patlewicz G, Niemela J, Mekenyan O. A stepwise approach for defining the applicability domain of SAR and QSAR models. J Chem Inf Model 2005, 45:839–849.
139. Hewitt M, Ellison CM. Developing the applicability domain of in silico models: relevance, importance and methods. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 301–333.
140. Schultz TW, Hewitt M, Netzeva TI, Cronin MTD. Assessing applicability domains of toxicological QSARs: definition, confidence in predicted values, and the role of mechanisms of action. QSAR Comb Sci 2007, 26:238–254.
141. Aptula AO, Roberts DW. Mechanistic applicability domains for nonanimal-based prediction of toxicological end points: general principles and application to reactive toxicity. Chem Res Toxicol 2006, 19:1097–1105.
142. Toropov AA, Benfenati E. Additive SMILES-based optimal descriptors in QSAR modelling bee toxicity: using rare SMILES attributes to define the applicability domain. Bioorg Med Chem 2008, 16:4801–4809.
143. Hartung T. Lessons learned from alternative methods and their validation for a new toxicology in the 21st century. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 2010, 13:277–290.
144. Human Toxicology Project Consortium. Human Toxicology Project Consortium. Available at: http://www.thehamner.org/content/HTOX_flyer_10.pdf. (Accessed October 17, 2015).
145. Bhattacharya S, Zhang Q, Carmichael PL, Boekelheide K, Andersen ME. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: defining new risk assessment approaches based on perturbation of intracellular toxicity pathways. PLoS One 2011, 6:e20887.
146. Tollefsen KE, Scholz S, Cronin MT, Edwards SW, de Knecht J, Crofton K, Garcia-Reyero N, Hartung T, Worth A, Patlewicz G. Applying adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) to support integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA). Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2014, 70:625–640.
147. National Toxicology Program. A National Toxicology Program for the 21st Century: roadmap to achieve the NTP vision. 2004. Available at: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/ntpvision/ntproadmap_508.pdf. (Accessed October 17, 2015).
148. National Research Council. Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007.
149. Balls M. Integrated testing strategies and the prediction of toxic hazard. In: Cronin MTD, Madden JC, eds. In Silico Toxicology: Principles and Applications. Cambridge, UK: The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2010, 584–605.
150. Kleensang A, Maertens A, Rosenberg M, Fitzpatrick S, Lamb J, Auerbach S, Brennan R, Crofton KM, Gordon B, Fornace AJ Jr, et al. t4 workshop report: pathways of toxicity. ALTEX 2014, 31:53–61.
151. Hareng L, Pellizzer C, Bremer S, Schwarz M, Hartung T. The integrated project ReProTect: a novel approach in reproductive toxicity hazard assessment. Reprod Toxicol 2005, 20:441–452.
152. Dix DJ, Houck KA, Martin MT, Richard AM, Setzer RW, Kavlock RJ. The ToxCast program for prioritizing toxicity testing of environmental chemicals. Toxicol Sci 2007, 95:5–12.
153. Shukla SJ, Huang R, Austin CP, Xia M. The future of toxicity testing: a focus on in vitro methods using a quantitative high-throughput screening platform. Drug Discov Today 2010, 15:997–1007.
154. Stephens ML, Barrow C, Andersen ME, Boekelheide K, Carmichael PL, Holsapple MP, Lafranconi M. Accelerating the development of 21st-century toxicology: outcome of a human toxicology project consortium workshop. Toxicol Sci 2012, 125:327–334.