Literature DB >> 15065202

Assessment of the sensitivity of the computational programs DEREK, TOPKAT, and MCASE in the prediction of the genotoxicity of pharmaceutical molecules.

Ronald D Snyder1, Greg S Pearl, George Mandakas, Wai Nang Choy, Federico Goodsaid, I Y Rosenblum.   

Abstract

Computational models are currently being used by regulatory agencies and within the pharmaceutical industry to predict the mutagenic potential of new chemical entities. These models rely heavily, although not exclusively, on bacterial mutagenicity data of nonpharmaceutical-type molecules as the primary knowledge base. To what extent, if any, this has limited the ability of these programs to predict genotoxicity of pharmaceuticals is not clear. In order to address this question, a panel of 394 marketed pharmaceuticals with Ames Salmonella reversion assay and other genetic toxicology findings was extracted from the 2000-2002 Physicians' Desk Reference and evaluated using MCASE, TOPKAT, and DEREK, the three most commonly used computational databases. These evaluations indicate a generally poor sensitivity of all systems for predicting Ames positivity (43.4-51.9% sensitivity) and even poorer sensitivity in prediction of other genotoxicities (e.g., in vitro cytogenetics positive; 21.3-31.9%). As might be expected, all three programs were more highly predictive for molecules containing carcinogenicity structural alerts (i.e., the so-called Ashby alerts; 61% +/- 14% sensitivity) than for those without such alerts (12% +/- 6% sensitivity). Taking all genotoxicity assay findings into consideration, there were 84 instances in which positive genotoxicity results could not be explained in terms of structural alerts, suggesting the possibility of alternative mechanisms of genotoxicity not relating to covalent drug-DNA interaction. These observations suggest that the current computational systems when applied in a traditional global sense do not provide sufficient predictivity of bacterial mutagenicity (and are even less accurate at predicting genotoxicity in tests other than the Salmonella reversion assay) to be of significant value in routine drug safety applications. This relative inability of all three programs to predict the genotoxicity of drugs not carrying obvious DNA-reactive moieties is discussed with respect to the nature of the drugs whose positive responses were not predicted and to expectations of improving the predictivity of these programs. Limitations are primarily a consequence of incomplete understanding of the fundamental genotoxic mechanisms of nonstructurally alerting drugs rather than inherent deficiencies in the computational programs. Irrespective of their predictive power, however, these programs are valuable repositories of structure-activity relationship mutagenicity data that can be useful in directing chemical synthesis in early drug discovery. Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15065202     DOI: 10.1002/em.20013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen        ISSN: 0893-6692            Impact factor:   3.216


  11 in total

1.  Global structure-activity relationship model for nonmutagenic carcinogens using virtual ligand-protein interactions as model descriptors.

Authors:  Albert R Cunningham; C Alex Carrasquer; Shahid Qamar; Jon M Maguire; Suzanne L Cunningham; John O Trent
Journal:  Carcinogenesis       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 4.944

2.  Combined use of pharmacophoric models together with drug metabolism and genotoxicity "in silico" studies in the hit finding process.

Authors:  Ma José Jerez; Miguel Jerez; Coral González-García; Sara Ballester; Ana Castro
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Effect of training data size and noise level on support vector machines virtual screening of genotoxic compounds from large compound libraries.

Authors:  Pankaj Kumar; Xiaohua Ma; Xianghui Liu; Jia Jia; Han Bucong; Ying Xue; Ze Rong Li; Sheng Yong Yang; Yu Quan Wei; Yu Zong Chen
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  In vitro genotoxicity of rocuronium bromide in human peripheral lymphocytes.

Authors:  Umit Zan; Mehmet Topaktas; Erman Salih Istifli
Journal:  Cytotechnology       Date:  2011-01-21       Impact factor: 2.058

5.  Computational toxicology: realizing the promise of the toxicity testing in the 21st century.

Authors:  Ivan Rusyn; George P Daston
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2010-05-18       Impact factor: 9.031

6.  An investigation into pharmaceutically relevant mutagenicity data and the influence on Ames predictive potential.

Authors:  Patrick McCarren; Clayton Springer; Lewis Whitehead
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 5.514

7.  Multidimensional insights involving electrochemical and in silico investigation into the corrosion inhibition of newly synthesized pyrazolotriazole derivatives on carbon steel in a HCl solution.

Authors:  Lei Guo; Youness El Bakri; El Hassane Anouar; Jianhong Tan; Savaş Kaya; El Mokhtar Essassi
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2019-10-29       Impact factor: 4.036

8.  Novel curcumin- and emodin-related compounds identified by in silico 2D/3D conformer screening induce apoptosis in tumor cells.

Authors:  Melanie Füllbeck; Xiaohua Huang; Renate Dumdey; Cornelius Frommel; Wolfgang Dubiel; Robert Preissner
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2005-08-05       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Development and experimental test of support vector machines virtual screening method for searching Src inhibitors from large compound libraries.

Authors:  Bucong Han; Xiaohua Ma; Ruiying Zhao; Jingxian Zhang; Xiaona Wei; Xianghui Liu; Xin Liu; Cunlong Zhang; Chunyan Tan; Yuyang Jiang; Yuzong Chen
Journal:  Chem Cent J       Date:  2012-11-23       Impact factor: 4.215

10.  Necessity for retrospective evaluation of past-positive chemicals in in vitro chromosomal aberration tests using recommended cytotoxicity indices.

Authors:  Hiroshi Honda; Yurika Fujita; Toshio Kasamatsu; Anne Fuchs; Rolf Fautz; Osamu Morita
Journal:  Genes Environ       Date:  2018-01-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.