Literature DB >> 35386221

Comparing the performance and coverage of selected in silico (liver) metabolism tools relative to reported studies in the literature to inform analogue selection in read-across: A case study.

Matthew Boyce1,2, Brian Meyer2, Chris Grulke2, Lucina Lizarraga3, Grace Patlewicz2.   

Abstract

Changes in the regulatory landscape of chemical safety assessment call for the use of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) including read-across to fill data gaps. One critical aspect of analogue evaluation is the extent to which target and source analogues are metabolically similar. In this study, a set of 37 structurally diverse chemicals were compiled from the EPA ToxCast inventory to compare and contrast a selection of metabolism in silico tools, in terms of their coverage and performance relative to metabolism information reported in the literature. The aim was to build understanding of the scope and capabilities of these tools and how they could be utilised in a read-across assessment. The tools were Systematic Generation of Metabolites (SyGMa), Meteor Nexus, BioTransformer, Tissue Metabolism Simulator (TIMES), OECD Toolbox, and Chemical Transformation Simulator (CTS). Performance was characterised by sensitivity and precision determined by comparing predictions against literature reported metabolites (from 44 publications). A coverage score was derived to provide a relative quantitative comparison between the tools. Meteor, TIMES, Toolbox, and CTS predictions were run in batch mode, using default settings. SyGMa and BioTransformer were run with user-defined settings, (two passes of phase I and one pass of phase II). Hierarchical clustering revealed high similarity between TIMES and Toolbox. SyGMa had the highest coverage, matching an average of 38.63% of predictions generated by the other tools though was prone to significant overprediction. It generated 5,125 metabolites, which represented 54.67% of all predictions. Precision and sensitivity values ranged from 1.1-29% and 14.7-28.3% respectively. The Toolbox had the highest performance overall. A case study was presented for 3,4-Toluenediamine (3,4-TDA), assessed for the derivation of screening-level Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTVs), was used to demonstrate the practical role in silico metabolism information can play in analogue evaluation as part of a read-across approach.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BioTransfomer; CTS; Meteor Nexus; OECD Toolbox; PPRTV; SyGMa; TIMES; in silico tools; metabolism; read-across

Year:  2022        PMID: 35386221      PMCID: PMC8979226          DOI: 10.1016/j.comtox.2021.100208

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Toxicol        ISSN: 2468-1113


  34 in total

1.  SyGMa: combining expert knowledge and empirical scoring in the prediction of metabolites.

Authors:  Lars Ridder; Markus Wagener
Journal:  ChemMedChem       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.466

2.  A framework for using structural, reactivity, metabolic and physicochemical similarity to evaluate the suitability of analogs for SAR-based toxicological assessments.

Authors:  Shengde Wu; Karen Blackburn; Jack Amburgey; Joanna Jaworska; Thomas Federle
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2009-09-19       Impact factor: 3.271

Review 3.  Predicting drug metabolism: experiment and/or computation?

Authors:  Johannes Kirchmair; Andreas H Göller; Dieter Lang; Jens Kunze; Bernard Testa; Ian D Wilson; Robert C Glen; Gisbert Schneider
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 84.694

4.  Generalized Read-Across (GenRA): A workflow implemented into the EPA CompTox Chemicals Dashboard.

Authors:  George Helman; Imran Shah; Antony J Williams; Jeff Edwards; Jeremy Dunne; Grace Patlewicz
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 6.043

5.  CIIPro: a new read-across portal to fill data gaps using public large-scale chemical and biological data.

Authors:  Daniel P Russo; Marlene T Kim; Wenyi Wang; Daniel Pinolini; Sunil Shende; Judy Strickland; Thomas Hartung; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 6.937

Review 6.  DILIrank: the largest reference drug list ranked by the risk for developing drug-induced liver injury in humans.

Authors:  Minjun Chen; Ayako Suzuki; Shraddha Thakkar; Ke Yu; Chuchu Hu; Weida Tong
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 7.851

7.  Towards grouping concepts based on new approach methodologies in chemical hazard assessment: the read-across approach of the EU-ToxRisk project.

Authors:  Sylvia E Escher; Hennicke Kamp; Susanne H Bennekou; Annette Bitsch; Ciarán Fisher; Rabea Graepel; Jan G Hengstler; Matthias Herzler; Derek Knight; Marcel Leist; Ulf Norinder; Gladys Ouédraogo; Manuel Pastor; Sharon Stuard; Andrew White; Barbara Zdrazil; Bob van de Water; Dinant Kroese
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 5.153

8.  ClassyFire: automated chemical classification with a comprehensive, computable taxonomy.

Authors:  Yannick Djoumbou Feunang; Roman Eisner; Craig Knox; Leonid Chepelev; Janna Hastings; Gareth Owen; Eoin Fahy; Christoph Steinbeck; Shankar Subramanian; Evan Bolton; Russell Greiner; David S Wishart
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 5.514

9.  The CompTox Chemistry Dashboard: a community data resource for environmental chemistry.

Authors:  Antony J Williams; Christopher M Grulke; Jeff Edwards; Andrew D McEachran; Kamel Mansouri; Nancy C Baker; Grace Patlewicz; Imran Shah; John F Wambaugh; Richard S Judson; Ann M Richard
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 5.514

10.  EPA's DSSTox database: History of development of a curated chemistry resource supporting computational toxicology research.

Authors:  Christopher M Grulke; Antony J Williams; Inthirany Thillanadarajah; Ann M Richard
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2019-11-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.