Literature DB >> 23669331

Use of in silico systems and expert knowledge for structure-based assessment of potentially mutagenic impurities.

Andreas Sutter1, Alexander Amberg, Scott Boyer, Alessandro Brigo, Joseph F Contrera, Laura L Custer, Krista L Dobo, Veronique Gervais, Susanne Glowienke, Jacky van Gompel, Nigel Greene, Wolfgang Muster, John Nicolette, M Vijayaraj Reddy, Veronique Thybaud, Esther Vock, Angela T White, Lutz Müller.   

Abstract

Genotoxicity hazard identification is part of the impurity qualification process for drug substances and products, the first step of which being the prediction of their potential DNA reactivity using in silico (quantitative) structure-activity relationship (Q)SAR models/systems. This white paper provides information relevant to the development of the draft harmonized tripartite guideline ICH M7 on potentially DNA-reactive/mutagenic impurities in pharmaceuticals and their application in practice. It explains relevant (Q)SAR methodologies as well as the added value of expert knowledge. Moreover, the predictive value of the different methodologies analyzed in two surveys conveyed in the US and European pharmaceutical industry is compared: most pharmaceutical companies used a rule-based expert system as their primary methodology, yielding negative predictivity values of ⩾78% in all participating companies. A further increase (>90%) was often achieved by an additional expert review and/or a second QSAR methodology. Also in the latter case, an expert review was mandatory, especially when conflicting results were obtained. Based on the available data, we concluded that a rule-based expert system complemented by either expert knowledge or a second (Q)SAR model is appropriate. A maximal transparency of the assessment process (e.g. methods, results, arguments of weight-of-evidence approach) achieved by e.g. data sharing initiatives and the use of standards for reporting will enable regulators to fully understand the results of the analysis. Overall, the procedures presented here for structure-based assessment are considered appropriate for regulatory submissions in the scope of ICH M7.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  (Q)SAR; Genotoxic impurities; ICH M7; In silico; Mutagenicity

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23669331     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2013.05.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  11 in total

1.  In silico toxicology protocols.

Authors:  Glenn J Myatt; Ernst Ahlberg; Yumi Akahori; David Allen; Alexander Amberg; Lennart T Anger; Aynur Aptula; Scott Auerbach; Lisa Beilke; Phillip Bellion; Romualdo Benigni; Joel Bercu; Ewan D Booth; Dave Bower; Alessandro Brigo; Natalie Burden; Zoryana Cammerer; Mark T D Cronin; Kevin P Cross; Laura Custer; Magdalena Dettwiler; Krista Dobo; Kevin A Ford; Marie C Fortin; Samantha E Gad-McDonald; Nichola Gellatly; Véronique Gervais; Kyle P Glover; Susanne Glowienke; Jacky Van Gompel; Steve Gutsell; Barry Hardy; James S Harvey; Jedd Hillegass; Masamitsu Honma; Jui-Hua Hsieh; Chia-Wen Hsu; Kathy Hughes; Candice Johnson; Robert Jolly; David Jones; Ray Kemper; Michelle O Kenyon; Marlene T Kim; Naomi L Kruhlak; Sunil A Kulkarni; Klaus Kümmerer; Penny Leavitt; Bernhard Majer; Scott Masten; Scott Miller; Janet Moser; Moiz Mumtaz; Wolfgang Muster; Louise Neilson; Tudor I Oprea; Grace Patlewicz; Alexandre Paulino; Elena Lo Piparo; Mark Powley; Donald P Quigley; M Vijayaraj Reddy; Andrea-Nicole Richarz; Patricia Ruiz; Benoit Schilter; Rositsa Serafimova; Wendy Simpson; Lidiya Stavitskaya; Reinhard Stidl; Diana Suarez-Rodriguez; David T Szabo; Andrew Teasdale; Alejandra Trejo-Martin; Jean-Pierre Valentin; Anna Vuorinen; Brian A Wall; Pete Watts; Angela T White; Joerg Wichard; Kristine L Witt; Adam Woolley; David Woolley; Craig Zwickl; Catrin Hasselgren
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 3.271

2.  Use of In Silico Methods for Regulatory Toxicological Assessment of Pharmaceutical Impurities.

Authors:  Simona Kovarich; Claudia Ileana Cappelli
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

3.  In Silico Prediction of Chemically Induced Mutagenicity: A Weight of Evidence Approach Integrating Information from QSAR Models and Read-Across Predictions.

Authors:  Enrico Mombelli; Giuseppa Raitano; Emilio Benfenati
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

4.  Increasing the Value of Data Within a Large Pharmaceutical Company Through In Silico Models.

Authors:  Alessandro Brigo; Doha Naga; Wolfgang Muster
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

5.  Transitioning to composite bacterial mutagenicity models in ICH M7 (Q)SAR analyses.

Authors:  Curran Landry; Marlene T Kim; Naomi L Kruhlak; Kevin P Cross; Roustem Saiakhov; Suman Chakravarti; Lidiya Stavitskaya
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2019-10-03       Impact factor: 3.271

6.  The innovative medicines initiative: a public private partnership model to foster drug discovery.

Authors:  Elisabetta Vaudano
Journal:  Comput Struct Biotechnol J       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 7.271

7.  Migration of styrene oligomers from food contact materials: in silico prediction of possible genotoxicity.

Authors:  Elisa Beneventi; Christophe Goldbeck; Sebastian Zellmer; Stefan Merkel; Andreas Luch; Thomas Tietz
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-08-13       Impact factor: 6.168

8.  Improvement of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) tools for predicting Ames mutagenicity: outcomes of the Ames/QSAR International Challenge Project.

Authors:  Masamitsu Honma; Airi Kitazawa; Alex Cayley; Richard V Williams; Chris Barber; Thierry Hanser; Roustem Saiakhov; Suman Chakravarti; Glenn J Myatt; Kevin P Cross; Emilio Benfenati; Giuseppa Raitano; Ovanes Mekenyan; Petko Petkov; Cecilia Bossa; Romualdo Benigni; Chiara Laura Battistelli; Alessandro Giuliani; Olga Tcheremenskaia; Christine DeMeo; Ulf Norinder; Hiromi Koga; Ciloy Jose; Nina Jeliazkova; Nikolay Kochev; Vesselina Paskaleva; Chihae Yang; Pankaj R Daga; Robert D Clark; James Rathman
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 3.000

9.  Management of pharmaceutical ICH M7 (Q)SAR predictions - The impact of model updates.

Authors:  Catrin Hasselgren; Joel Bercu; Alex Cayley; Kevin Cross; Susanne Glowienke; Naomi Kruhlak; Wolfgang Muster; John Nicolette; M Vijayaraj Reddy; Roustem Saiakhov; Krista Dobo
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2020-10-13       Impact factor: 3.271

10.  A Comprehensive Evaluation of Sdox, a Promising H2S-Releasing Doxorubicin for the Treatment of Chemoresistant Tumors.

Authors:  Petko Alov; Merilin Al Sharif; Denitsa Aluani; Konstantin Chegaev; Jelena Dinic; Aleksandra Divac Rankov; Miguel X Fernandes; Fabio Fusi; Alfonso T García-Sosa; Risto Juvonen; Magdalena Kondeva-Burdina; José M Padrón; Ilza Pajeva; Tania Pencheva; Adrián Puerta; Hannu Raunio; Chiara Riganti; Ivanka Tsakovska; Virginia Tzankova; Yordan Yordanov; Simona Saponara
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-03-07       Impact factor: 5.810

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.