New clues on carcinogenicity-related substructures derived from mining two large datasets of chemical compounds

References

• Regulations R. No. 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council, on classification, labeling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and Amending Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006, Official J. Eur Union. 2008:L353.
   Google Scholar
• Arcos JC Chemical Induction of Cancer: Modulation and Combination Effects. An Inventory of the Many Factors Which Influence Carcinogenesis. Springer Science & Business Media: Birkhäuser Boston; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Woo Y, Lai D. Mechanisms of action of chemical carcinogens, and their role in Structure-Activity Relationships (SAR) analysis and risk assessment. In: Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models of mutagens and carcinogens. (R. Benigni, ed.) 2003:41–80.
   Google Scholar
• Huff J. Long‐term chemical carcinogenesis bioassays predict human cancer hazards: Issues, controversies, and uncertainties. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1999;895(1):56–79.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tomatis L. Identification of carcinogenic agents and primary prevention of cancer. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2006;1076(1):1–14.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Doll R. The causes of cancer. Revue d'épidémiologie et de santé publique. 2001;49(2):193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ames BN, Gold LS. Chemical carcinogenesis: Too many rodent carcinogens. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 1990;87(19):7772–7776.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anisimov VN, Ukraintseva SV, Yashin AI. Cancer in rodents: Does it tell us about cancer in humans? Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5(10):807–819.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knight A, Bailey J, Balcombe J. Animal carcinogenicity studies: 1. Poor human predictivity. Altern Lab Anim. 2006;34(1):19–27.
   Google Scholar
• Knight A, Bailey J, Balcombe J. Animal carcinogenicity studies: 2. Obstacles to extrapolation of data to humans. Altern Lab Anim. 2006;34(1):29–38.
   Google Scholar
• Ward JM. The two-year rodent carcinogenesis bioassay—Will it survive? J Toxicol Pathol. 2007;20(1):13–19.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby J, Paton D. The influence of chemical structure on the extent and sites of carcinogenesis for 522 rodent carcinogens and 55 different human carcinogen exposures. Mutat Res, Fundam Mol Mech Mutagen. 1993;286(1):3–74.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ward JM, Rat or mouse cancer bioassay—Or none of the above? Toxicol Pathol. 24(6):734–735.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louekari K, Sihvonen K, Kuittinen M, Sømnes V. In vitro tests within the REACH information strategies. Alternatives to laboratory animals. ATLA. 2006;34(4):377–386.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Combes R, Grindon C, Cronin M, Roberts DW Garrod JF. Integrated decision-tree testing strategies for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity with respect to the requirements of the EU REACH legislation. Alternatives to laboratory animals. ATLA. 2008;36:43–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells MY, Williams ES. The transgenic mouse assay as an alternative test method for regulatory carcinogenicity studies—Implications for REACH. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2009;53(2):150–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C. Predictivity of QSAR. J Chem Inf Model. 2008;48(5):971–980.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C. Predictivity and reliability of QSAR models: The case of mutagens and carcinogens. Toxicol Mech Methods. 2008;18(2–3):137–147.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller J, Miller E. Origins of human cancer. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY; 1977:605–627.
   Google Scholar
• Miller EC, Miller JA. Searches for ultimate chemical carcinogens and their reactions with cellular macromolecules. Cancer. 1981;47(10):2327–2345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashby J, Tennant RW. Chemical structure, Salmonella mutagenicity and extent of carcinogenicity as indicators of genotoxic carcinogenesis among 222 chemicals tested in rodents by the US NCI/NTP. Mutat Res. 1988;204(1):17–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C, Tcheremenskaia O, Giuliani A. Alternatives to the carcinogenicity bioassay: In silico methods, and the in vitro and in vivo mutagenicity assays. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2010;6(7):809–819.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C. Structure alerts for carcinogenicity, and the Salmonella assay system: A novel insight through the chemical relational databases technology. Mutat Res. 2008;659(3):248–261.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C, Tcheremenskaia O. Nongenotoxic carcinogenicity of chemicals: Mechanisms of action and early recognition through a new set of structural alerts. Chem Rev. 2013;113(5):2940–2957.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toxtree, Ideaconsult Ltd, Sofia, Bulgaria. http://toxtree.sourceforge.net/.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenkranz H. Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models of chemical mutagens and carcinogens. In: Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models of chemical mutagens and carcinogens. Boca Raton, FL, CRC Press; 2003;175–206.
   Google Scholar
• OncoLogic, Environmental Protection Agency. http://www2.epa.gov/tsca-screening-tools/oncologictm-computer-system-evaluate-carcinogenic-potential-chemicals.
   Google Scholar
• Derek Nexus, Lhasa Limited, Leeds, UK. http://www.lhasalimited.org.
   Google Scholar
• Gini G, Ferrari T, Cattaneo D, Golbamaki Bakhtyari N, Manganaro A, Benfenati E. Automatic knowledge extraction from chemical structures: the case of mutagenicity prediction. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2013;24(5):365–383.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VEGA. Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri Milano. http://www.vega-qsar.eu.
   Google Scholar
• ANTARES project, Grant Agreement LIFE08 ENV/IT/00435. http://www.antares-life.eu/.
   Google Scholar
• CAESAR project, no. 022674—SSPI. http://www.caesar-project.eu/.
   Google Scholar
• Gold LS The Carcinogenic Potency Project and Database (CPDB). University of California, Berkeley; Lawrence Berkeley, National Laboratory; National Library of Medicine's (NLM®); 2011. http://potency.berkeley.edu.
   Google Scholar
• Leadscope. http://www.leadscope.com/.
   Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Cecilia B. ISSCAN: Istituto Superiore di Sanita, “Chemical carcinogens: Structures and experimental data.” https://w3.iss.it/site/BancaDatiCancerogeni/.
   Google Scholar
• Kirkland D, Aardema M, Henderson L, Müller L. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens: I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity. Mutat Res, Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2005;584(1):1–256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• istMolBase. Kode. http://chm.kode-solutions.net/products_istmolbase.php.
   Google Scholar
• InstantJChem. ChemAxon. https://www.chemaxon. com/ products/ instant-jchem-suite/instant-jchem/.
   Google Scholar
• Weininger D. SMILES, a chemical language and information system. 1. Introduction to methodology and encoding rules. J Chem Inform Comp Sci. 1988;28(1):31–36.
   Google Scholar
• eChemPortal. In: Organisation of Economic Co-Operation and Development. http://www.echemportal.org/echemportal/index?pageID=0&request_locale=en.
   Google Scholar
• Classification Labelling and Packaging inventory. In: European Chemicals Agency. http://echa.europa.eu/it/regulations/clp/cl-inventory.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrari T, Gini G, Bakhtyari NG, Benfenati E. Mining toxicity structural alerts from SMILES: A new way to derive Structure Activity Relationships. In: Computational Intelligence and Data Mining (CIDM), IEEE Symposium on: 11–15 April 2011:120–127.
   Google Scholar
• Tropsha A, Gramatica P, Gombar VK. The importance of being earnest: Validation is the absolute essential for successful application and interpretation of QSPR models. QSAR Comb Sci. 2003;22(1):69–77.
   Google Scholar
• Perkins R, Fang H, Tong W, Welsh WJ. Quantitative structure‐activity relationship methods: Perspectives on drug discovery and toxicology. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2003;22(8):1666–1679.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceccaroli C, Pulliero A, Geretto M, Izzotti A. Molecular fingerprints of environmental carcinogens in human cancer. J Environ Sci Health, Part C: Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev. 2015;33(2):188–228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazius J, McGuire R, Bursi R. Derivation and validation of toxicophores for mutagenicity prediction. J Med Chem. 2005;48(1):312–320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassano A, Raitano G, Mombelli E, Fernández A, Cester J, Roncaglioni A, Benfenati E. Evaluation of QSAR Models for the prediction of Ames genotoxicity: A retrospective exercise on the chemical substances registered under the EU REACH regulation. J Environ Sci Health, Part C: Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev. 2014;32(3):273–298.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gini G, Franchi AM, Manganaro A, Golbamaki A, Benfenati E. ToxRead: A tool to assist in read across and its use to assess mutagenicity of chemicals. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2014;25(12):999–1011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benfenati E, Manganelli S, Giordano S, Raitano G, Manganaro A. Hierarchical rules for read-across and in silico models of mutagenicity. J Environ Sci Health, Part C: Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev. 2015;33(4):385–403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Battistelli CL, Bossa C, Giuliani A, Tcheremenskaia O. Alternative toxicity testing: Analyses on skin sensitization, toxcast Phases I and II, and carcinogenicity provide indications on how to model mechanisms linked to adverse outcome pathways. J Environ Sci Health, Part C: Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev. 2015;33(4):422–443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar