Literature DB >> 19685274

Quantitative and qualitative models for carcinogenicity prediction for non-congeneric chemicals using CP ANN method for regulatory uses.

Natalja Fjodorova1, Marjan Vračko, Marjan Tušar, Aneta Jezierska, Marjana Novič, Ralph Kühne, Gerrit Schüürmann.   

Abstract

The new European chemicals regulation Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals entered into force in June 2007 and accelerated the development of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models for a variety of endpoints, including carcinogenicity. Here, we would like to present quantitative (continuous) and qualitative (categorical) models for non-congeneric chemicals for prediction of carcinogenic potency. A dataset of 805 substances was obtained after a preliminary screening of findings of rodent carcinogenicity for 1,481 chemicals accessible via Distributed Structure-Searchable Toxicity (DSSTox) Public Database Network originated from the Lois Gold Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB). Twenty seven two-dimensional MDL descriptors were selected using Kohonen mapping and principal component analysis. The counter propagation artificial neural network (CP ANN) technique was applied. Quantitative models were developed exploring the relationship between the experimental and predicted carcinogenic potency expressed as a tumorgenic dose TD(50) for rats. The obtained models showed low prediction power with correlation coefficient less than 0.5 for the test set. In the next step, qualitative models were developed. We found that the qualitative models exhibit good accuracy for the training set (92%). The model demonstrated good predicted performance for the test set. It was obtained accuracy (68%), sensitivity (73%), and specificity (63%). We believe that CP ANN method is a good in silico approach for modeling and predicting rodent carcinogenicity for non-congeneric chemicals and may find application for other toxicological endpoints.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19685274     DOI: 10.1007/s11030-009-9190-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Divers        ISSN: 1381-1991            Impact factor:   2.943


  53 in total

Review 1.  Quantitative structure-activity relationships for predicting mutagenicity and carcinogenicity.

Authors:  Grace Patlewicz; Rosemary Rodford; John D Walker
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 3.742

Review 2.  Structure-activity relationship studies of chemical mutagens and carcinogens: mechanistic investigations and prediction approaches.

Authors:  Romualdo Benigni
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 60.622

3.  Computer-aided rodent carcinogenicity prediction.

Authors:  Alexey A Lagunin; John C Dearden; Dmitri A Filimonov; Vladimir V Poroikov
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2005-10-03       Impact factor: 2.433

4.  SFTG international collaborative study on in vitro micronucleus test II. Using human lymphocytes.

Authors:  M Gillian Clare; Giocondo Lorenzon; Leslie C Akhurst; Daniel Marzin; Joost van Delft; Regina Montero; Alain Botta; Arma Bertens; Serena Cinelli; Véronique Thybaud; Elisabeth Lorge
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  2006-06-12       Impact factor: 2.433

5.  Designing compound subsets: comparison of random and rational approaches using statistical simulation.

Authors:  Siew Kuen Yeap; Rosalind J Walley; Mike Snarey; Willem P van Hoorn; Jonathan S Mason
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2007-10-06       Impact factor: 4.956

Review 6.  Directions in QSAR modeling for regulatory uses in OECD member countries, EU and in Russia.

Authors:  Natalja Fjodorova; Marjana Novich; Marjan Vrachko; Vjacheslav Smirnov; Nina Kharchevnikova; Zoya Zholdakova; Sergei Novikov; Natalja Skvortsova; Dmitrii Filimonov; Vladimir Poroikov; Emilio Benfenati
Journal:  J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev       Date:  2008 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 3.781

7.  A CASE-SAR analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon carcinogenicity.

Authors:  A M Richard; Y T Woo
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.433

8.  Prediction of rodent carcinogenicity bioassays from molecular structure using inductive logic programming.

Authors:  R D King; A Srinivasan
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  No-observed effect levels for carcinogenicity and for in vivo mutagenicity of a genotoxic carcinogen.

Authors:  Manabu Hoshi; Keiichirou Morimura; Hideki Wanibuchi; Min Wei; Eriko Okochi; Toshikazu Ushijima; Kunio Takaoka; Shoji Fukushima
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2004-07-28       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 10.  Use of QSARs in international decision-making frameworks to predict health effects of chemical substances.

Authors:  Mark T D Cronin; Joanna S Jaworska; John D Walker; Michael H I Comber; Christopher D Watts; Andrew P Worth
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 9.031

View more
  8 in total

1.  Some findings relevant to the mechanistic interpretation in the case of predictive models for carcinogenicity based on the counter propagation artificial neural network.

Authors:  Natalja Fjodorova; Marjana Novič
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  Evaluating the applicability domain in the case of classification predictive models for carcinogenicity based on the counter propagation artificial neural network.

Authors:  Natalja Fjodorova; Marjana Novič; Alessandra Roncaglioni; Emilio Benfenati
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Prediction of carcinogenicity for diverse chemicals based on substructure grouping and SVM modeling.

Authors:  Kazutoshi Tanabe; Bono Lučić; Dragan Amić; Takio Kurita; Mikio Kaihara; Natsuo Onodera; Takahiro Suzuki
Journal:  Mol Divers       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 2.943

4.  Artificial intelligence uncovers carcinogenic human metabolites.

Authors:  Aayushi Mittal; Sanjay Kumar Mohanty; Vishakha Gautam; Sakshi Arora; Sheetanshu Saproo; Ria Gupta; Roshan Sivakumar; Prakriti Garg; Anmol Aggarwal; Padmasini Raghavachary; Nilesh Kumar Dixit; Vijay Pal Singh; Anurag Mehta; Juhi Tayal; Srivatsava Naidu; Debarka Sengupta; Gaurav Ahuja
Journal:  Nat Chem Biol       Date:  2022-08-11       Impact factor: 16.174

5.  Cupressus sempervirens Essential Oil: Exploring the Antibacterial Multitarget Mechanisms, Chemcomputational Toxicity Prediction, and Safety Assessment in Zebrafish Embryos.

Authors:  Sarra Akermi; Slim Smaoui; Khaoula Elhadef; Mariam Fourati; Nacim Louhichi; Moufida Chaari; Ahlem Chakchouk Mtibaa; Aissette Baanannou; Saber Masmoudi; Lotfi Mellouli
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 4.927

6.  A graph neural network approach for molecule carcinogenicity prediction.

Authors:  Philip Fradkin; Adamo Young; Lazar Atanackovic; Brendan Frey; Leo J Lee; Bo Wang
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 6.931

7.  New public QSAR model for carcinogenicity.

Authors:  Natalja Fjodorova; Marjan Vracko; Marjana Novic; Alessandra Roncaglioni; Emilio Benfenati
Journal:  Chem Cent J       Date:  2010-07-29       Impact factor: 4.215

8.  CarcinoPred-EL: Novel models for predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals using molecular fingerprints and ensemble learning methods.

Authors:  Li Zhang; Haixin Ai; Wen Chen; Zimo Yin; Huan Hu; Junfeng Zhu; Jian Zhao; Qi Zhao; Hongsheng Liu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.