Greener chemicals for the future: QSAR modelling of the PBT index using ETA descriptors

References

• R. Pool and E. Rusch, Identifying and reducing environmental health risks of chemicals in our society, National Academies Press, Washington DC, USA, Workshop Summary, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• S. Arora and T.N. Cason, An experiment in voluntary environmental regulation: Participation in EPA’s 33/50 program, J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 28 (1995), pp. 271–286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations, Canada National reporting to CSD-18/19 thematic profile on chemicals (2013). Available at http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/dsd_aofw_ni/ni_pdfs/NationalReports/canada/Chemicals.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• S.L. Chena, P.T. Lua, H.L. Leea, C.H. Lua, S.Y. Yuana, H.Y. Tsaib, and J.R. Chen, Risk management and regulatory control of toxic chemicals in Taiwan, Chem. Eng. Trans. 31 (2013), pp. 241–246.
   Google Scholar
• Ospar Commission, Convention for the protection of the marine environment of the North-East Atlantic, 1992 http://www.ospar.org/, Paris, France.
   Google Scholar
• Persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic profiles estimated for organic chemicals on-line, 2006. http://www.pbtprofiler.net/. Personal Communication to Christina Motilall, [email protected], US EPA, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• J.G. Dorea, Fish meal in animal feed and human exposure to persistent bioaccumulative and toxic substances, J. Food Prot. 69 (2006), pp. 2777–2785.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R.L. Lipnick, J.L.M. Hermens, K.C. Jones, and D.C.G. Muir, Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals I: Fate and Exposure, ACS Publications, Washington DC, USA, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• D. Mackay and A. Fraser, Bioaccumulation of persistent organic chemicals: Mechanisms and models, Environ. Pollut. 110 (2000), pp. 375–391.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Safer chemicals, healthy families, Persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals (PBTs), http://saferchemicals.org/get-the-facts/chemicals-of-concern/persistent-bioaccumulative-and-toxic-chemicals-pbts/.
   Google Scholar
• P. Bendig, F. Hagele, and W. Vetter, Widespread occurrence of polyhalogenated compounds in fat from kitchen hoods, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 405 (2013), pp. 7485–7496.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US Environmental Protection Agency, PBT Final Rule Summary, Washington DC, USA, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/pbtrule-sum.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• O. Cardoso, J.-M. Porcher, and W. Sanchez, Factory-discharged pharmaceuticals could be a relevant source of aquatic environment contamination: Review of evidence and need for knowledge, Chemosphere 115 (2014), pp. 20–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• V. Di Nica, L. Menaballi, G. Azimonti, and A. Finizio, RANKVET: A new ranking method for comparing and prioritizing the environmental risk of veterinary pharmaceuticals, Ecol. Indic. 52 (2015), pp. 270–276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R.N. Das and K. Roy, Advances in QSPR/QSTR models of ionic liquids for the design of greener solvents of the future, Mol. Divers. 17 (2013), pp. 151–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Papa and P. Gramatica, QSPR as a support for the EU REACH regulation and rational design of environmentally safer chemicals: PBT identification from molecular structure, Green Chem. 12 (2010), pp. 836–843.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Gramatica and E. Papa, Screening and ranking of POPs for global half-life: QSAR approaches for prioritization based on molecular structure, Environ. Sci. Technol. 41 (2007), pp. 2833–2839.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Gramatica and E. Papa, An update of the BCF QSAR model based on theoretical molecular descriptors, Mol. Inform. 24 (2005), pp. 953–960.
   Google Scholar
• E. Papa, F. Villa, and P. Gramatica, Statistically validated QSARs, based on theoretical descriptors, for modeling aquatic toxicity of organic chemicals in Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow), J. Chem. Inf. Model. 45 (2005), pp. 1256–1266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. Carlsen and J.D. Walker, QSARs for prioritizing PBT substances to promote pollution prevention, Mol. Inform. 22 (2003), pp. 49–57.
   Google Scholar
• S. Dimitrov, G. Veith, and O. Mekenyan, Application of in Silico Metabolism and Environmental Degradation Data to Support Chemical PBT Assessment. Handbook of Metabolic Pathways of Xenobiotics, Wiley, New Jersey, USA, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• F. Pizzo, A. Lombardo, A. Manganaro, C.I. Cappelli, M.I. Petoumenou, F. Albanese, A. Roncaglioni, M. Brandt, and E. Benfenati, Integrated in silico strategy for PBT assessment and prioritization under REACH, Environ. Res. 151 (2010), pp. 478–492.
   Google Scholar
• J.A. Arnot and F.A.P.C. Gobas, A generic QSAR for assessing the bioaccumulation potential of organic chemicals in aquatic food webs, Mol. Inform. 22 (2003), pp. 337–345.
   Google Scholar
• V. Christen, S. Hickmann, B. Rechenberg, and K. Fent, Highly active human pharmaceuticals in aquatic systems: A concept for their identification based on their mode of action, Aquat. Toxicol. 96 (2010), pp. 167–181.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Lienert, K. Gudel, and B.I. Escher, Screening method for ecotoxicological hazard assessment of 42 pharmaceuticals considering human metabolism and excretory routes, Environ. Sci. Technol. 41 (2007), pp. 4471–4478.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Roy and G. Ghosh, QSTR with extended topochemical atom indices. 2. Fish toxicity of substituted benzenes, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 (2004), pp. 559–567.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• A. Sangion and P. Gramatica, PBT assessment and prioritization of contaminants of emerging concern: Pharmaceuticals, Environ. Res. 147 (2016), pp. 297–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IBS Interbioscreen, Synthetic compounds, database available at https://www.ibscreen.com/synthetic-compounds.
   Google Scholar
• V.M. Alves, E.N. Muratov, A. Zakharov, N.N. Muratov, C.H. Andrade, and A. Tropsha, Chemical toxicity prediction for major classes of industrial chemicals: Is it possible to develop universal models covering cosmetics, drugs, and pesticides?, Food Chem. Toxicol. (2017), 112 ( 2018), pp. 526–534. doi:10.1016/j.fct.2017.04.008.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• K. Roy and G. Ghosh, Exploring QSARs with extended topochemical atom (ETA) indices for modeling chemical and drug toxicity, Curr. Pharm. Des. 16 (2010), pp. 2625–2639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.W. Yap, PaDEL-Descriptor: An open source software to calculate molecular descriptors and fingerprints, J. Comput. Chem. 32 (2011), pp. 1466–1474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dragon version 7, Kode srl, Milan, Italy, 2016; software available at http://www.talete.mi.it/index.htm.
   Google Scholar
• P. Ambure, R.B. Aher, A. Gajewicz, T. Puzyn, and K. Roy, “NanoBRIDGES” software: Open access tools to perform QSAR and nano-QSAR modeling, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 147 (2015), pp. 1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Racz, D. Bajusz, and K. Heberger, Consistency of QSAR models: Correct split of training and test sets, ranking of models and performance parameters, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 26 (2015), pp. 683–700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H.-S. Park and J. Chi-Hyuck, A simple and fast algorithm for K-medoids clustering, Expert Sys. Appl. 36 (2009), pp. 3336–3341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R.W. Kennard and L.A. Stone, Computer aided design of experiments, Technometrics, 11 (1969), pp. 137–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Golmohammadi, Z. Dashtbozorgi, and W.E. Acree, Quantitative structure–activity relationship prediction of blood-to-brain partitioning behavior using support vector machine, Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 47 (2012), pp. 421–429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dataset Division GUI 1.2, Version – 1.2, Kolkata, India, 2017; Software available at http://dtclab.webs.com/software-tools.
   Google Scholar
• Modified k-Medoid, Version – 1.2, Kolkata, India, 2017; Software available at http://teqip.jdvu.ac.in/QSAR_Tools/.
   Google Scholar
• K. Roy and P. Ambure, The “double cross-validation” software tool for MLR QSAR model development, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 159 (2016), pp. 108–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P.T. Pope and J.T. Webster, The use of an F-statistic in stepwise regression procedures, Technometrics 14 (1972), pp. 327–340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Leardi, Genetic algorithms in chemometrics and chemistry: A review, J. Chemom. 15 (2001), pp. 559–569.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Baumann and K. Baumann, Reliable estimation of prediction errors for QSAR models under model uncertainty using double cross-validation, J. Cheminform. 6 (2014), p. 47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Roy, S. Kar, and R.N. Das, Understanding the Basics of QSAR for Applications in Pharmaceutical Sciences and Risk Assessment, Academic Press, New York, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• K. Roy, R.N. Das, P. Ambure, and R.B. Aher, Be aware of error measures, Further studies on validation of predictive QSAR models, Chemom Intell Lab Sys, 152 (2016), pp. 18–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Rücker, G. Rücker, and M. Meringer, y-Randomization and its variants in QSPR/QSAR, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 47 (2007), pp. 2345–2357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Rücker, G. Rücker, and M. Meringer, Y-Randomization – A useful tool in QSAR validation, or folklore?, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 47 (2007), pp. 2345–2357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Y.H. Yun, D.M. Wu, G.Y. Li, Q.Y. Zhang, X. Yang, Q.F. Li, D.S. Cao, and Q.S. Xu, A strategy on the definition of applicability domain of model based on population analysis, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Sys, 170 (2017), pp. 77–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Roy, S. Kar, and P. Ambure, On a simple approach for determining applicability domain of QSAR models, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Sys, 145 (2015), pp. 22–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drugbank, OMx Personal Health Analytics, Inc., Canada, 2017, https://www.drugbank.ca/.
   Google Scholar
• NCBI, National Center for Biotechnology Information, Bethesda MD, USA, 2017, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pccompound/advanced/.
   Google Scholar
• Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, UK, 2017; http://www.chemspider.com/.
   Google Scholar
• D. Gadaleta, G.F. Mangiatordi, M. Catto, A. Carotti, and O. Nicolotti, Applicability domain for QSAR models: Where theory meets reality, Int. J. Quant. Struct.–Prop. Relat. 1 (2016), pp. 45–63.
   Google Scholar
• P. Gramatica, S. Cassani, and A. Sangion, PBT assessment and prioritization by PBT index and consensus modeling: Comparison of screening results from structural models, Environ. Int. 77 (2015), pp. 25–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Roy, P. Ambure, S. Kar, and P.K. Ojha, Is it possible to improve the quality of predictions from an “intelligent” use of multiple QSAR/QSPR/QSTR models?, J. Chemom. (2018), doi:10.1002/cem.2992.
   Google Scholar