Nano(Q)SAR: Challenges, pitfalls and perspectives

References

• Anderson W, Kozak D, Coleman VA, Jämting ÅK, Trau M. 2013. A comparative study of submicron particle sizing platforms: accuracy, precision and resolution analysis of polydisperse particle size distributions. J Colloid Interface Sci 405:322–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baalousha M, Lead JR. 2013. Nanoparticle dispersity in toxicology. Nat Nanotechnol 8:308–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bajorath J. 2004. Chemoinformatics: Concepts, Methods, and Tools For Drug Discovery. Totowa (NJ): Humana Press
   Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C. 2008. Predictivity and reliability of QSAR models: the case of mutagens and carcinogens. Toxicol Mech Methods 18:137–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Netzeva TI, Benfenati E, Bossa C, Franke R, Helma C, et al. 2007. The expanding role of predictive toxicology: an update on the (Q) sar models for mutagens and carcinogens. J Env Sci Health C 25:53–97
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolcic-Tavcar M, Vracko M. 2009. Assessing the reproductive toxicity of some (Con) azole compounds using a structure-activity relationship approach. Sar QSAR Environ Res 20:7–8
   Google Scholar
• Borders TL, Fonseca AF, Zhang H, Cho K, Rusinko Iii A. 2013. Developing descriptors to predict mechanical properties of nanotubes. J Chem Inf Model 53:773–82
   Google Scholar
• Burello E, Worth AP. 2011a. QSAR modeling of nanomaterials. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 3:298–306
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burello E, Worth AP. 2011b. A theoretical framework for predicting the oxidative stress potential of oxide nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology 5:228–35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byers D, Szerlog M. 1997. A rapid and low cost hazard categorization technique for identifying hazardous wastes. In Field Analytical Methods for Hazardous Wastes and Toxic Chemicals. Air & Waste Management Association, 35–44
   Google Scholar
• Cardin R, Michielan L, Moro S, Sperduti A. 2009. PCA-Based Representations of Graphs for Prediction in QSAR Studies. Artificial Neural Networks–Icann 2009. Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany: Springer
   Google Scholar
• Cassani S, Kovarich S, Papa E, Roy PP, Van Der Wal L, Gramatica P. 2013. Daphnia and fish toxicity of (benzo) triazoles: validated qsar models, and interspecies quantitative activity-activity modelling. J Hazard Mater 258–259:50–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chau YT, Yap CW. 2012. Quantitative nanostructure-activity relationship modelling of nanoparticles. Rsc Adv 2:8489–96
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chirico N, Gramatica P. 2011. Real external predictivity of qsar models: how to evaluate it? comparison of different validation criteria and proposal of using the concordance correlation coefficient. J Chem Inform Model 51:2320–35
   Google Scholar
• Cronin MT, Jaworska JS, Walker JD, Comber MH, Watts CD, Worth AP. 2003a. Use of QSARS in international decision-making frameworks to predict health effects of chemical substances. Environ Health Perspect 111:1391
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin MT, Walker JD, Jaworska JS, Comber MH, Watts CD, Worth AP. 2003b. Use of QSARS in international decision-making frameworks to predict ecologic effects and environmental fate of chemical substances. Environ Health Perspect 111:1376
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dudek AZ, Arodz T, Galvez J. 2006. Computational methods in developing quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR): a review. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen 9:213–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffus JH, Nordberg M, Templeton DM. 2007. Glossary of terms used in toxicology, (IUPAC recommendations 2007). Pure Appl Chem 79:1153–344
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epa VC, Burden FR, Tassa C, Weissleder R, Shaw S, Winkler DA. 2012. Modeling biological activities of nanoparticles. Nano Lett 12:5808–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson L, Andersson PL, Johansson E, Tysklind M. 2006. Megavariate analysis of environmental qsar data. Part I – A basic framework founded on principal component analysis (PCA), partial least squares (PLS), and statistical molecular design (SMD). Mol Divers 10:169–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esch RK, Han L, Foarde KK, Ensor DS. 2010. Endotoxin contamination of engineered nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology 4:73–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eurachem. 1998. The Fitness for Purpose of Analytical Methods. A Laboratory Guide To Method Validation And Related Topics. Eurachem. Available at: http://www.eurachem.org/index.php/publications/guides/mv. Accessed on 23 August 2014
   Google Scholar
• Euronews. 2013. Eu Extends Ban On Animal-Tested Cosmetics. Euronews. Available at: http://www.euronews.com/2013/03/11/eu-extends-ban-on-animal-tested-cosmetics/. Accessed on 23 August 2014
   Google Scholar
• Fadeel B, Savolainen K. 2013. Broaden the discussion. Nat Nanotechnol 8:71
   Google Scholar
• Fischer M. 1997. Computational neural networks: a new paradigm for spatial analysis. Environ Plann A 30:1873–91
   Google Scholar
• Foss Hansen S, Larsen BH, Olsen SI, Baun A. 2007. Categorization framework to aid hazard identification of nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology 1:243–50
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fourches D, Pu D, Tassa C, Weissleder R, Shaw SY, Mumper RJ, Tropsha A. 2010. Quantitative nanostructure–activity relationship modeling. Acs Nano 4:5703–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fourches D, Pu D, Tropsha A. 2011. Exploring quantitative nanostructure-activity relationships (QNAR) modeling as a tool for predicting biological effects of manufactured nanoparticles. Comb Chem High T Scr 14:217–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank RA, Sanderson H, Kavanagh R, Burnison BK, Headley JV, Solomon KR. 2009. Use of a (quantitative) structure–activity relationship [(Q) Sar] model to predict the toxicity of naphthenic acids. J Toxicol Environ Health A 73:319–29
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gajewicz A, Rasulev B, Dinadayalane TC, Urbaszek P, Puzyn T, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J. 2012. Advancing risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials: application of computational approaches. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 64:1663–93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghorbanzadeh M, Fatemi MH, Karimpour M. 2012. Modeling the cellular uptake of magnetofluorescent nanoparticles in pancreatic cancer cells: a quantitative structure activity relationship study. Ind Eng Chem Res 51:10712–18
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glotzer SC, Solomon MJ. 2007. Anisotropy of building blocks and their assembly into complex structures. Nat Mater 6:557–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golbraikh A, Shen M, Xiao Z, Xiao Y-D, Lee K-H, Tropsha A. 2003. Rational selection of training and test sets for the development of validated QSAR models. J Comput Aided Mol Des 17:241–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golbraikh A, Tropsha A. 2002. Beware of Q2! J Mol Graphics Model 20:269–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg L. 1983. Structure-Activity Correlation As a Predictive Tool in Toxicology. New York (NY): Hemisphere Publ Corp
   Google Scholar
• Gubbels-Van Hal I. 2007. Non-testing in reach? Chim Oggi 25:14–16
   Google Scholar
• Guha R, Jurs PC. 2005. Interpreting computational neural network QSAR models: a measure of descriptor importance. J Chem Inform Model 45:800–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gütlein M, Helma C, Karwath A, Kramer S. 2013. A large-scale empirical evaluation of cross-validation and external test set validation in (Q)SAR. Mol Info 32:516–28
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hsiao I-L, Huang Y-J. 2011. Improving the interferences of methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium and IL-8 assays in assessing the cytotoxicity of nanoparticles. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 11:5228–33
   Google Scholar
• Hulzebos E, Janssen P, Maslankiewicz L, Meijerink M, Muller J, Pelgrom S, et al. 2001. The application of structure-activity relationships in human hazard assessment: a first approach. RIVM report 601516008, Bilthoven, the Netherlands
   Google Scholar
• Jaworska JS, Comber M, Auer C, Van Leeuwen C. 2003. Summary of a workshop on regulatory acceptance of (Q)SARS for human health and environmental endpoints. Environ Health Perspect 111:1358
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston H, Pojana G, Zuin S, Jacobsen NR, Møller P, Loft S, et al. 2013. Engineered nanomaterial risk. lessons learnt from completed nanotoxicology studies: potential solutions to current and future challenges. Crit Rev Toxicol 43:1–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kar S, Gajewicz A, Puzyn T, Roy K. 2014. Nano-quantitative structure–activity relationship modeling using easily computable and interpretable descriptors for uptake of magnetofluorescent engineered nanoparticles in pancreatic cancer cells. Toxicol In Vitro 28:600–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kearns P, Gonzalez M, Oki N, Lee K, Rodriguez F. 2009. The safety of nanotechnologies at the OECD. In Nanomaterials: Risks and Benefits. Netherlands: Springer, 351–8
   Google Scholar
• Konovalov DA, Llewellyn LE, Vander Heyden Y, Coomans D. 2008. Robust cross-validation of linear regression QSAR models. J Chem Info Model 48:2081–94
   Google Scholar
• Lahl U, Gundert-Remy U. 2008. The use of (Q)SAR methods in the context of reach. Toxicol Mechan Method 18:149–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liszeková D, Polakovičová M, Beňo M, Farkaš R. 2009. Molecular determinants of juvenile hormone action as revealed by 3D QSAR analysis in Drosophila. PLoS One 4:E6001
   Google Scholar
• Liu R, Rallo R, George S, Ji Z, Nair S, Nel AE, Cohen Y. 2011. Classification nanosar development for cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. Small 7:1118–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu R, Rallo R, Weissleder R, Tassa C, Shaw S, Cohen Y. 2013a. Nano-sar development for bioactivity of nanoparticles with considerations of decision boundaries. Small 9:1842–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu R, Zhang HY, Ji ZX, Rallo R, Xia T, Chang CH, Nel A, Cohen Y. 2013b. Development of structure-activity relationship for metal oxide nanoparticles. Nanoscale 5:5644–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowe MF, Mccall D. 2009. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). Arlington: US Environmental Agency
   Google Scholar
• Lubinski L, Urbaszek P, Gajewicz A, Cronin M, Enoch S, Madden J, et al. 2013. Evaluation criteria for the quality of published experimental data on nanomaterials and their usefulness for QSAR modelling. SAR QSAR Environ Res 24:995–1008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansouri K, Ringsted T, Ballabio D, Todeschini R, Consonni V. 2013. Quantitative structure–activity relationship models for ready biodegradability of chemicals. J Chem Info Model 53:867–78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer J, Cheeseman M, Twaroski M. 2008. Structure–activity relationship analysis tools: validation and applicability in predicting carcinogens. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 50:50–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mays C, Benfenati E, Pardoe S. 2012. Use and perceived benefits and barriers of QSAR models for reach: findings from a questionnaire to stakeholders. Chem Cent J 6:1–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mccall MJ, Coleman VA, Herrmann J, Kirby JK, Gardner IR, Brent PJ, Johnson CM. 2013. A tiered approach. Nat Nanotechnol 8:307–8
   Google Scholar
• Mckinney JD, Richard A, Waller C, Newman MC, Gerberick F. 2000. The practice of structure activity relationships (SAR) in toxicology. Toxicol Sci 56:8–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mekenyan O, Dimitrov S, Pavlov T, Veith G. 2005. Pops: a QSAR system for developing categories for persistent, bioacculative and toxic chemicals and their metabolites. SAR QSAR Env Res 16:103–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monteiro-Riviere NA, Tran CL. 2014. Nanotoxicology: Progress Toward Nanomedicine. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press
   Google Scholar
• Murdock RC, Braydich-Stolle L, Schrand AM, Schlager JJ, Hussain SM. 2008. Characterization of nanomaterial dispersion in solution prior to in vitro exposure using dynamic light scattering technique. Toxicol Sci 101:239–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson BC, Petersen EJ, Marquis BJ, Atha DH, Elliott JT, Cleveland D, et al. 2013. Nist gold nanoparticle reference materials do not induce oxidative DNA damage. Nanotoxicology 7:21–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumeyer A, Bukowski M, Veith M, Lehr C-M, Daum N. 2014. Non-invasive determination of cellular oxygen consumption as novel cytotoxicity assay for nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology 8:50–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NRC. 2009. Review of Federal Strategy for Nanotechnology-Related Environmental, Health, and Safety Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2007a. Guidance document on the validation of (quantitative) structure–activity relationship models. Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 69
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2007b. Guidance on the grouping of chemicals. Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 80
   Google Scholar
• Panneerselvam S, Choi S. 2014. Nanoinformatics: emerging databases and available tools. Int J Mol Sci 15:7158–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pathakoti K, Huang M-J, Watts JD, He X, Hwang H-M. 2014. Using experimental data of Escherichia coli to develop a QSAR model for predicting the photo-induced cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. J Photochem Photobiol B 130:234–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patlewicz G. 2005. Chemical Categories and Read Across. Joint Research Centre. Report no. EUR 21898 EN
   Google Scholar
• Patlewicz G, Ball N, Booth ED, Hulzebos E, Zvinavashe E, Hennes C. 2013. Use of category approaches, read-across and (Q)SAR: general considerations. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 67:1–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patlewicz G, Chen M, Bellin, C. 2011. Non-testing approaches under reach–help or hindrance? Perspectives from a practitioner within industry. SAR QSAR Environ Res 22:67–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petkov P, Temelkov S, Villeneuve D, Ankley G, Mekenyan O. 2009. Mechanism-based categorization of aromatase inhibitors: a potential discovery and screening tool. SAR QSAR Environ Res 20:657–78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puzyn T, Gajewicz A, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J. 2010. Nanomaterials – the next great challenge for qsar modelers. In Recent Advances in QSAR Studies. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
   Google Scholar
• Puzyn T, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J. 2009. Toward the development of “nano-QSARS”: advances and challenges. Small 5:2494–509
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puzyn T, Rasulev B, Gajewicz A, Hu X, Dasari TP, Michalkova A, et al. 2011. Using nano-QSAR to predict the cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. Nat Nanotechnol 6:175–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richarz AN, Cronin M, Madden J, Lubinski L, Mokshina E, Urbaszek P, et al. 2013. Toxicity of nanomaterials: availability and suitability of data for the development of in silico models. Toxicol Lett 221:S246
   Google Scholar
• Roco MC, Bainbridge WS. 2005. Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology: maximizing human benefit. J Nanopart Res 7:1–13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shao C-Y, Chen S-Z, Su B-H, Tseng YJ, Esposito EX, Hopfinger AJ. 2013. Dependence of QSAR models on the selection of trial descriptor sets: a demonstration using nanotoxicity endpoints of decorated nanotubes. J Chem Info Model 53:142–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh KP, Gupta S. 2014. Nano-QSAR modeling for predicting biological activity of diverse nanomaterials. Rsc Adv 4:13215–30
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone V, Nowack B, Baun A, Van Den Brink N, Von Der Kammer F, Dusinska M, et al. 2010. Nanomaterials for environmental studies: classification, reference material issues, and strategies for physico-chemical characterisation. Sci Total Environ 408:1745–54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sussman N, Arena V, Yu S, Mazumdar S, Thampatty B. 2003. Decision tree sar models for developmental toxicity based on an FDA/TERIS database. SAR QSAR Environ Res 14:83–96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tantra R, Shard A. 2013. We need answers. Nat Nanotechnol 8:71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tebby C, Mombelli E, Pandard P, Péry AR. 2011. Exploring an ecotoxicity database with the OECD (Q)SAR toolbox and dragon descriptors in order to prioritise testing on algae, daphnids, and fish. Sci Total Environ 409:3334–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toropov AA, Toropova AP, Puzyn T, Benfenati E, Gini G, Leszczynska D, Leszczynski J. 2013. QSAR a random event: modeling of nanoparticles uptake in PACA2 cancer cells. Chemosphere 92:31–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen C, Vermeire T, Vermeire T. 2007a. Risk Assessment of Chemicals: An Introduction. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
   Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen CJ, Patlewicz GY, Worth AP. 2007b. Intelligent Testing Strategies. Risk Assessment of Chemicals. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
   Google Scholar
• Verhaar H, Van Leeuwen C, Bol J, Hermens J. 1994. Application of QSARS in risk management of existing chemicals. SAR QSAR Environ Res 2:39–58
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang XZ, Yang Y, Li RF, Mcguinnes C, Adamson J, Megson IL, Donaldson K. 2013. Principal component and causal analysis of structural and acute in vitro toxicity data for nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology 8:465–76
   Google Scholar
• Wessel MD, Jurs PC. 1994. Prediction of reduced ion mobility constants from structural information using multiple linear regression analysis and computational neural networks. Anal Chem 66:2480–7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkler DA, Burden FR. 2002. Application of neural networks to large dataset qsar, virtual screening, and library design. Combinatorial Library, 325–67
   Google Scholar
• Winkler DA, Mombelli E, Pietroiusti A, Tran L, Worth A, Fadeel B, Mccall MJ. 2012. Applying quantitative structure-activity relationship approaches to nanotoxicology: current status and future potential. Toxicology 313:15–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao X, Panaye A, Doucet J-P, Zhang R, Chen H, Liu M, et al. 2004. Comparative study of QSAR/QSPR correlations using support vector machines, radial basis function neural networks, and multiple linear regression. J Chem Inform Comput Sci 44:1257–66
   PubMedGoogle Scholar