Literature DB >> 27152554

Conformal Prediction Classification of a Large Data Set of Environmental Chemicals from ToxCast and Tox21 Estrogen Receptor Assays.

Ulf Norinder1, Scott Boyer1.   

Abstract

Quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) are critical to exploitation of the chemical information in toxicology databases. Exploitation can be extraction of chemical knowledge from the data but also making predictions of new chemicals based on quantitative analysis of past findings. In this study, we analyzed the ToxCast and Tox21 estrogen receptor data sets using Conformal Prediction to enhance the full exploitation of the information in these data sets. We applied aggregated conformal prediction (ACP) to the ToxCast and Tox21 estrogen receptor data sets using support vector machine classifiers to compare overall performance of the models but, more importantly, to explore the performance of ACP on data sets that are significantly enriched in one class without employing sampling strategies of the training set. ACP was also used to investigate the problem of applicability domain using both data sets. Comparison of ACP to previous results obtained on the same data sets using traditional QSAR approaches indicated similar overall balanced performance to methods in which careful training set selections were made, e.g., sensitivity and specificity for the external Tox21 data set of 70-75% and far superior results to those obtained using traditional methods without training set sampling where the corresponding results showed a clear imbalance of 50 and 96%, respectively. Application of conformal prediction to imbalanced data sets facilitates an unambiguous analysis of all data, allows accurate predictive models to be built which display similar accuracy in external validation to external validation, and, most importantly, allows an unambiguous treatment of the applicability domain.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27152554     DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00037

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol        ISSN: 0893-228X            Impact factor:   3.739


  8 in total

1.  Modelling compound cytotoxicity using conformal prediction and PubChem HTS data.

Authors:  Fredrik Svensson; Ulf Norinder; Andreas Bender
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 3.524

2.  The Next Generation Blueprint of Computational Toxicology at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Authors:  Russell S Thomas; Tina Bahadori; Timothy J Buckley; John Cowden; Chad Deisenroth; Kathie L Dionisio; Jeffrey B Frithsen; Christopher M Grulke; Maureen R Gwinn; Joshua A Harrill; Mark Higuchi; Keith A Houck; Michael F Hughes; E Sidney Hunter; Kristin K Isaacs; Richard S Judson; Thomas B Knudsen; Jason C Lambert; Monica Linnenbrink; Todd M Martin; Seth R Newton; Stephanie Padilla; Grace Patlewicz; Katie Paul-Friedman; Katherine A Phillips; Ann M Richard; Reeder Sams; Timothy J Shafer; R Woodrow Setzer; Imran Shah; Jane E Simmons; Steven O Simmons; Amar Singh; Jon R Sobus; Mark Strynar; Adam Swank; Rogelio Tornero-Valez; Elin M Ulrich; Daniel L Villeneuve; John F Wambaugh; Barbara A Wetmore; Antony J Williams
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 4.849

3.  Efficiency of different measures for defining the applicability domain of classification models.

Authors:  Waldemar Klingspohn; Miriam Mathea; Antonius Ter Laak; Nikolaus Heinrich; Knut Baumann
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 5.514

Review 4.  The Role of Omics in the Application of Adverse Outcome Pathways for Chemical Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Erica K Brockmeier; Geoff Hodges; Thomas H Hutchinson; Emma Butler; Markus Hecker; Knut Erik Tollefsen; Natalia Garcia-Reyero; Peter Kille; Dörthe Becker; Kevin Chipman; John Colbourne; Timothy W Collette; Andrew Cossins; Mark Cronin; Peter Graystock; Steve Gutsell; Dries Knapen; Ioanna Katsiadaki; Anke Lange; Stuart Marshall; Stewart F Owen; Edward J Perkins; Stewart Plaistow; Anthony Schroeder; Daisy Taylor; Mark Viant; Gerald Ankley; Francesco Falciani
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 4.849

5.  Predicting Aromatic Amine Mutagenicity with Confidence: A Case Study Using Conformal Prediction.

Authors:  Ulf Norinder; Glenn Myatt; Ernst Ahlberg
Journal:  Biomolecules       Date:  2018-08-29

6.  DeepSnap-Deep Learning Approach Predicts Progesterone Receptor Antagonist Activity With High Performance.

Authors:  Yasunari Matsuzaka; Yoshihiro Uesawa
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-01-22

7.  Structure-activity relationship-based chemical classification of highly imbalanced Tox21 datasets.

Authors:  Gabriel Idakwo; Sundar Thangapandian; Joseph Luttrell; Yan Li; Nan Wang; Zhaoxian Zhou; Huixiao Hong; Bei Yang; Chaoyang Zhang; Ping Gong
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 5.514

8.  A Toxicity Prediction Tool for Potential Agonist/Antagonist Activities in Molecular Initiating Events Based on Chemical Structures.

Authors:  Kota Kurosaki; Raymond Wu; Yoshihiro Uesawa
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 5.923

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.