In silico techniques for the study and prediction of xenobiotic metabolism: A review

References

• Anders MW, Dekant W. Glutathione-dependent bioactivation of haloalkanes. Annual Reviews in Pharmacology and Toxicology 1998; 38: 501–537
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker A, Granger J, Castro-Perez J, Kirby J, McCullagh M, McSweeney N. Advances in automated metabolite identification software tools couple with in-silico metabolite prediction using LC-TOF-MS-MS. Drug Metabolism Reviews 2004; 36: 1–247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borghoff SJ, Short BG, Swenberg JA. Biochemical mechanisms and pathobiology of α2u-globulin nephropathy. Annual Reviews in Pharmacology and Toxicology 1990; 30: 349–367
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin MTD, Schultz WT. Structure–toxicity relationships for phenols to Tetrahymena pyriformis. Chemosphere 1996; 32: 1453–1468
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darvas F. MetabolExpert, an expert system for predicting metabolism of substances. QSAR in environmental toxicology, K Kaiser. Riedel, Dordrecht 1987; 71–81
   Google Scholar
• Darvas F. Predicting metabolic pathways by logic programming. Journal of Molecular Graphics 1988; 6: 80–86
   Google Scholar
• Darvas F, Marakhazi S, Kormos P, Kulkarni G, Kalasz H, Papp A. Drug metabolism, databases and high throughput testing during drug design and development. 1st, IUPAC Chemical Data Series, PE Erhard. Blackwell, Oxford 1999; 237–270
   Google Scholar
• Dewar MJS, Zoebisch EG, Healy EF, Stewart JJP. AM1: A new general purpose quantum mechanical molecular model. Journal of the American Chemistry Society 107 1984; 13: 3902–3909
   Google Scholar
• Greene N. Knowledge based expert systems for toxicity and metabolism prediction. Drug metabolism, databases in high-throughput testing during drug design and development, PW Erhardt. Blackwell, Oxford 1999; 289–296
   Google Scholar
• Greene N, Judson PN, Langowski JJ, Marchant CA. Knowledge-based expert systems for toxicity and metabolism prediction: DEREK, StAR, and METEOR. SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research 1999; 10: 299–313
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guengerich FP. Metabolism of chemical carcinogens. Carcinogenesis 2000; 21: 345–351
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guengerich FP, Shimada T. Activation of procarcinogens by human cytochrome P450 enzymes. Mutation Research 1998; 400: 201–203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ioannides C. Xenobiotic metabolism and bioactivation by cytochromes P-450. Biomolecular free radical toxicity: causes and prevention, H Wiseman, P Goldfarb, T Ridgway, A Wiseman. Wiley, Chichester 2000; 103–144
   Google Scholar
• Judson PN, Fox J, Krause PJ. Using new reasoning technology in chemical information systems. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Science 1996; 37: 621–624
   Google Scholar
• Klopman G. Artificial intelligence approach to structure–activity studies. Computer automated structure evaluation of biological activity of organic molecules. Journal of the American Chemistry Society 1984; 106: 7315–7320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klopman G. MULTICASE 1. A hierarchical computer automated structure evaluation program. Quantitative Structure–Activity Relationships 1992; 11: 176–184
   Google Scholar
• Klopman G, Dimayuga M, Talafous J. META 1. A program for evaluation of metabolic transformation of chemicals. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Science 1994; 34: 1320–1325
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Könemann WH. Quantitative structure–activity relationships in fish toxicity studies. Part 1: Relationships for 50 industrial pollutants. Toxicology 1981; 19: 209–221
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kriek E, Rojas M, Alexandrov K, Bartsch H. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon–DNA adducts in humans: relevance as biomarkers for exposure and cancer risk. Mutation Research 1998; 400: 215–231
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulkarni SA, Raje DV, Chakrabarti T. Quantitative structure–activity relationships based on functional and structural characteristics of organic compounds. SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research 2001; 12: 565–591
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mekenyan OG, Dimitrov SD, Pavlov TS, Veith GD. A systematic approach to simulating metabolism in computational toxicology. I. The TIMES heuristic modelling framework. Current Pharmacology Design 2004; 10: 1273–1293
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mekenyan OG, Nikolova N, Karabunarliev S, Bradbury S, Ankley G, Hansen B. New developments in a hazard identification algorithm for hormone receptor ligands. Quantitative Structure–Activity Relationships 1999; 18: 139–153
   Google Scholar
• Meylan WM, Howard PH. Atom/fragment contribution method for estimating octanol–water partition coefficients. Journal of Pharmacology Science 1995; 84: 84–92
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mollerup S, Ryberg D, Hewer A, Phillips D, Haugen A. Sex differences in lung CYP1A1 expression and DNA adduct levels among lung cancer patients. Cancer Research 1999; 59: 3317–3320
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monks TJ, Anders MW, Dekant W, Stevens JL, Lau SS, Van Bladeren PJ. Glutathione conjugate mediated toxicities. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 1990; 106: 1–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozawa N, Guengerich FP. Evidence for formation of an S-[2-(N7-guanyl)ethyl]glutathione adduct in glutathione-mediated binding of 1,2-dibromoethane to DNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. USA 1983; 80: 5266–5270
   Google Scholar
• Pfeiffer S, Borchert H. Biotransformation von Arzneimitteln. VEB, Berlin 1963
   Google Scholar
• Rannug U, Sundvall A, Ramel C. The mutagenic effect of 1,2-dichloroethane on Salmonella typhimurium. I. Activation through conjugation with glutathione in vitro. Chemico-Biological Interactions 1978; 20: 1–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell WMS, Birch RL. Principles of humane experimental technique. Methuen, London 1959
   Google Scholar
• Spann ML, Chu KC, Wipke WT, Ouchi G. Use of computerised methods to predict metabolic pathways and metabolites. Journal of Environmental Pathology and Toxicology 1978; 2: 123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart JJP. MOPAC: a semiempirical molecular orbital program. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 1990; 4: 1–105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang D, Phillips DH, Stampfer M, Mooney LA, Hsu Y, Cho S, Tsai W-Y, Jing Ma, Cole KJ, She MN, Perera FP. Association between carcinogen–DNA adducts in white blood cells and lung cancer risk in the physicians’ health study. Cancer Research 2001; 61: 6708–6712
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Testa B. The metabolism of drugs and other xenobiotics — biochemistry of redox reactions. Academic Press, London 1995
   Google Scholar
• Testa B, Jenner P. Drug metabolism: chemical and biochemical aspects. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY 1976
   Google Scholar
• Concepts in drug metabolism, B Testa, P Jenner. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY 1980
   Google Scholar
• Tonnelier CAG, Fox J, Judson PN, Krause PJ, Pappas N, Patel M. Representation of chemical structures in knowledge-based systems: the StAR system. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Science 1997; 37: 117–123
   Google Scholar
• Weinenger D. SMILES, a chemical language and information systems. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Science 1981; 21: 48
   Google Scholar