Development of classification- and regression-based QSAR models and in silico screening of skin sensitisation potential of diverse organic chemicals

References

• KarlbergT, BergstromMA, BorjeA, LuthmanK, NilssonJL. Allergic contact dermatitis – formation, structural requirements, and reactivity of skin sensitizers. Chem Res Toxicol. 2008;21:53–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• del SavioB, SherertzEF. Is allergic contact dermatitis being overlooked?Arch Fam Med. 1994;3:537–543.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• LiY, TsengYJ, PanD, LiuJ, KernPS, GerberickGF, HopfingerAJ. 4D-fingerprint categorical QSAR models for skin sensitization based on the classification of local lymph node assay measures. Chem Res Toxicol. 2007;20:114–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DivkovicM, PeaseCK, GerberickGF, BasketterDA. Hapten-protein binding: from theory to practical application in the in vitro prediction of skin sensitization. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;53:189–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BonefeldCM, LarsenJM, DabelsteenS, GeislerC, WhiteIR, MenneT, JohansenJD. Consumer available permanent hair dye products cause major allergic immune activation in an animal model. J Dermatol. 2010;162:102–107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JenkinsonC, JenkinsRE, MaggsJL, KitteringhamNR, AleksicM, ParkBK, NaisbittDJ. A mechanistic investigation into the irreversible protein binding and antigenicity of p-phenylenediamine. Chem Res Toxicol. 2009;22:1172–1180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Report of the world summit on sustainable development: Johannesburg, South Africa. 26 August–4 September 2002 (with corrigendum), United Nations, 2003 [Internet]. Available from: http://www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/documents/documents.html.
   Google Scholar
• Parliament adopts REACH: new EU Chemicals Legislation and New Chemicals Agency. 2006 [Internet]. Available from: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language = EN&type = IMPRESS&reference = 20061213IPR01493.
   Google Scholar
• BenigniR, GiulianiA. Putting the predictive toxicology challenge into perspective: reflections on the results. Bioinformatics. 2003;19:1194–1200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GollaS, MadihallyS, Jr RobinsonRL, GasemKAM. Quantitative structure–property relationship modeling of skin sensitization: a quantitative prediction. Toxicol In Vitro. 2009;23:454–465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GollaS, MadihallyS, RobinsonRL, GasemKAM. Quantitative structure–property relationship modeling of skin sensitization: a quantitative prediction. Toxicol In Vitro. 2009;23:454–465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AshbyJ, BasketterDA, PatonD, KimberI. Structure–activity relationships in skin sensitization using the murine local lymph node assay. Toxicology. 1995;103:177–194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MartinSF, EsserPR, SchmuckerS, DietzL, NaisbittDJ, ParkBK, VocansonM, NicolasJF, KellerM, PichlerWJ. T-cell recognition of chemicals, protein allergens and drugs: towards the development of in vitro assays. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2010;67:4171–4184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FedorowiczA, SinghH, SoderholmS, DemchukE. Structure–activity models for contact sensitization. Chem Res Toxicol. 2005;18:954–969.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GerberickF, AleksicM, BasketterD, CasatiS, KarlbergAT, KernP, KimberI, LepoittevinJP, NatschA, OvigneJM. Chemical reactivity measurement and the predictive identification of skin sensitisers. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 64. Altern Lab Anim. 2008;36:215–242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission, Directive 2006/121/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 amending Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances in order to adapt it to Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) and establishing a European Chemicals Agency. Off J Eur Union 2006, L 396/850 of 30.12.2006, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities (OPOCE), Luxembourg.
   Google Scholar
• KarS, RoyK. Predictive toxicology using QSAR: a perspective. J Indian Chem Soc. 2010;87:1455–1515.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ChenK, ChangS, HuangH, LinT, WuY, ChenCY. Three-in-one agonists for PPAR-α, PPAR-γ, and PPAR-δ screened from Traditional Chinese Medicine Database@Taiwan. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2012;30:662–683.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ChangS, HuangH, ChenH, ChenCY. High performance screening, structural and molecular dynamics analysis to identify H1 inhibitors from TCM Database@Taiwan. Mol Biosyst. 2011;7:3366–3374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Guidance Document on the Validation of (Quantitative) Structure–Activity Relationships [(Q) SAR] Models. ENV/JM/MONO. 2007;2:1–154.
   Google Scholar
• BasketterA, BalikieL, DearmanRJ, KimberI, RyanCA, GerberickGF, HarveyP, EvansP, WhiteIR, RycroftRJ. Use of the local lymph node assay for the estimation of relative contact allergenic potency. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:344–348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BasketterA, EvansP, FielderRJ, GerberickGF, DearmanRJ, KimberI. Local lymph node assay – validation, conduct and use in practice. Food Chem Toxicol. 2002;40:593–598.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BasketterDA, GerberickGF, KimberI, LovelessSE. The local lymph node assay: a viable alternative to currently accepted skin sensitization tests. Food Chem Toxicol. 1996;34:985–997.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DimitrovS, DimitrovaG, PavlovT, DimitrovaN, PatlewiczG, NiemelaJ, MekenyanO. A stepwise approach for defining the applicability domain of SAR and QSAR models. J Chem Inf Model. 2005;45:839–849.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FuruhamaA, HasunumaK, AokiY, YoshiokaY, ShiraishiH. Application of chemical reaction mechanistic domains to an ecotoxicity QSAR model, the KAshinhou Tool for Ecotoxicity (KATE). SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2011;22:505–523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LiuJ, KernPS, GerberickGF, Santos-FilhoOA, EspositoEX, HopfingerAJ, TsengYJ. Categorical QSAR models for skin sensitization based on local lymph node assay measures and both ground and excited state 4D-fingerprint descriptors. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2008;22:345–366.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PatlewiczG, RobertsDW, UriarteE. A comparison of reactivity schemes for the prediction skin sensitization potential. Chem Res Toxicol. 2008;21:521–541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MillerMD, YourteeDM, GlarosAG, ChappelowCC, EickJD, HolderAJ. Quantum mechanical structure–activity relationship analyses for skin sensitization. J Chem Inf Model. 2005;45:924–929.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GerberickGF. Skin sensitization in chemical risk assessment: report of a WHO/IPCS international workshop focusing on dose-response assessment. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2008;50:155–199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MarvinSketch 5.10.0 [Internet]. 1998–2012. ChemAxon Ltd. Available from: http://www.chemaxon.com.
   Google Scholar
• YapCW. PaDEL-descriptor: an open source software to calculate molecular descriptors and fingerprints. J Comput Chem. 2011;32:1466–1474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerius 2 version 4.10 software Accelrys Inc. [Internet]. San Diego, CA. Available from: http://www.accelrys.com/cerius2.
   Google Scholar
• DRAGON version 6 TALETE srl. [Internet]. Milan (Italy). Available from: http://www.talete.mi.it/products/dragon_molecular_descriptors.htm.
   Google Scholar
• RoyK. On some aspects of validation of predictive quantitative structure–activity relationship models. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2007;2:1567–1577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeonardJT, RoyK. On selection of training and test sets for the development of predictive QSAR models. QSAR Comb Sci. 2006;25:235–251.
   Google Scholar
• RoyPP, LeonardJT, RoyK. Exploring the impact of size of training sets for the development of predictive QSAR models. Chemom Intell Lab Syst. 2008;90:31–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MitteroeckerP, BooksteinF. Linear discrimination, ordination, and the visualization of selection gradients in modern morphometrics. Evol Biol. 2011;38:100–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• STATISTICA 7.1 STATSOFT Inc. [Internet]. Tulsa (OK). Available from: http://www.statsoft.com/.
   Google Scholar
• SPSS Statistical Software SPSS Inc. [Internet]. Chicago (Il). Available from: http://www.spss.com.
   Google Scholar
• MINITAB is a Statistical Software Minitab Inc. [Internet]. State College (PA). Available from: http://www.minitab.com.
   Google Scholar
• RoyK, MitraI. On various metrics used for validation of predictive QSAR models with applications in virtual screening and focused library design. Comb Chem High Throughput Screen. 2011;14:450–474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gálvez-LlompartM, RecioMC, García-DomenechR. Topological virtual screening: a way to find new compounds active in ulcerative colitis by inhibiting NF-κB. Mol Divers. 2011;15:917–926.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prado-PradoFJ, UriarteE, BorgesF, González-DíazH. Multi-target spectral moments for QSAR and complex networks study of antibacterial drugs. Eur J Med Chem. 2009;44:4516–4521.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FawcettT. An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recogn Lett. 2006;27:861–874.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perez-GarridoA, HelgueraAM, BorgesF, CordeiroMNDS, RiveroV, EscuderoAG. Two new parameters based on distances in a receiver operating characteristic chart for the selection of classification models. J Chem Inf Model. 2011;51:2746–2759.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murcia-SolerM, Pérez-GiménezF, García-MarchFJ, Salabert-SalvadorMT, Díaz-VillanuevW, Medina-CasamayorP. Discrimination and selection of new potential antibacterial compounds using simple topological descriptors. J Mol Graph Model. 2003;21:375–390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD Principles for the Validation of (Q)SARs. [Internet]. [cited 2012 May 9]. Available from: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/33/37/37849783.
   Google Scholar
• OECD, Environment Directorate, Joint Meeting of The Chemicals Committee and The Working Party on Chemicals, Pesticides and Biotechnology. [Internet]. [cited 2012 May 9]. Available from: http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2004doc.nsf/LinkTo/NT00009192/$FILE/JT00176183.
   Google Scholar
• GolbraikhA, TropshaA. Beware of q2!. J Mol Graphics Model. 2002;20:269–276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ConsonniV, BallabioD, TodeschiniR. Comments on the definition of the Q2 parameter for QSAR validation. J Chem Inf Model. 2009;49:1669–1678.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KarS, RoyK. First report on development of quantitative interspecies structure–carcinogenicity relationship models and exploring discriminatory features for rodent carcinogenicity of diverse organic chemicals using OECD guidelines. Chemosphere. 2012;87:339–355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TropshaA, GramaticaP, GombarVK. The importance of being earnest: validation is the absolute essential for successful application and interpretation of QSPR models. QSAR Comb Sci. 2003;22:69–77.
   Google Scholar
• MitraI, SahaA, RoyK. Exploring quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR) studies of antioxidant phenolic compounds obtained from traditional Chinese medicinal plants. Mol Simul. 2010;36:1067–1079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD Document. Guidance Document on the Validation of (Quantitative) 1226 Structure–Activity Relationships (Q)SARs] Models. ENV/JM/MONO(2007). 2007;2.
   Google Scholar
• GramaticaP. Principles of QSAR models validation: internal and external. QSAR Comb Sci. 2007;26:694–701.
   Google Scholar
• TsouY, ChenKC, LinHC, ChangSS, ChenCYC. Uroporphyrinogen decarboxylase as a potential target for specific components of traditional Chinese medicine: a virtual screening and molecular dynamics study. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:1–10.
   Google Scholar
• ChenKY, ChangSS, ChenCYC. In silico identification of potent pancreatic triacylglycerol lipase inhibitors from traditional Chinese medicine. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:1–11.
   Google Scholar
• TouWI, ChenCYC. Traditional Chinese medicine as dual guardians against hypertension and cancer?. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2012;30:299–317.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TouWI, ChenCYC. In silico investigation of potential Src kinase ligands from traditional Chinese medicine. PLoS ONE. 2012;7:1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ChangSS, HuangHJ, ChenCYC. Two birds with one stone? Possible dual-targeting H1N1 inhibitors from traditional Chinese medicine. PLoS ONE. 2011;7:1–16.
   Google Scholar
• YangSC, ChangSS, ChenHY, ChenCYC. Identification of potent EGFR inhibitors from TCM Database@Taiwan. PLoS ONE. 2011;7:1–10.
   Google Scholar
• ChenCYC. TCM Database@Taiwan: the world's largest traditional Chinese medicine database for drug screening in silico. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:1–5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TsaiTY, ChangKW, ChenCYC. iScreen: world's first cloud-computing web server for virtual screening and de novo drug design based on TCM database@Taiwan. J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2011;25:525–531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KnoxC, LawV, JewisonT, LiuP, LyS, FrolkisA, PonA, BancoK, MakC, NeveuV, DjoumbouY, EisnerR, GuoAC, WishartDS. DrugBank 3.0: a comprehensive resource for ‘Omics’ research on drugs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:D1035–D1041.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KreilingR, HollnagelHM, HarengL, EiglerD, LeeMS, GriemP, DreeßenB, KleberM, AlbrechtA, GarciaC, WendelA. Comparison of the skin sensitizing potential of unsaturated compounds as assessed by the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT). Food Chem Toxicol. 2008;46:1896–1904.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MatsushitaT, KamideR. Five cases of photocontact dermatitis due to topical ketoprofen: photopatch testing and cross-reaction study. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 2001;17:26–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar