Where developmental toxicity meets explainable artificial intelligence: state-of-the-art and perspectives

References

• Omiecinski CJ, Vanden Heuvel JP, Perdew GH, et al. Xenobiotic metabolism, disposition, and regulation by receptors: from biochemical phenomenon to predictors of major toxicities. Toxicol Sci. 2011;120(Supplement 1):S49–S75. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfq338
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roy RC. History of anesthesia and introduction to the specialty. In: Ehrenfeld J, Urman R Segal B, editors Anesthesia student survival guide: a case-based approach. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2022. p. 27–40.
   Google Scholar
• Downs JW, Wills BK. Phenol Toxicity. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Li AJ, Pal VK, Kannan K. A review of environmental occurrence, toxicity, biotransformation and biomonitoring of volatile organic compounds. Environ Chem Ecotoxicol. 2021;3:91–116. doi: 10.1016/j.enceco.2021.01.001
   Google Scholar
• Ross JA, Eldridge DL. Pediatric Toxicology. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2022;40(2):237–250. doi: 10.1016/j.emc.2022.01.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansouri K, Abdelaziz A, Rybacka A, et al. CERAPP: collaborative estrogen receptor activity prediction project. Environ Health Perspect. 2016;124(7):1023–1033. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1510267
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansouri K, Kleinstreuer N, Abdelaziz AM, et al. CoMPARA: collaborative modeling project for androgen receptor activity. Environ Health Perspect. 2020;128(2):027002. doi: 10.1289/EHP5580
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansouri K, Karmaus AL, Fitzpatrick J, et al. CATMoS: collaborative acute toxicity modeling suite. Environ Health Perspect. 2021;129(4):047013. doi: 10.1289/EHP8495
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trisciuzzi D, Alberga D, Mansouri K, et al. Predictive structure-based toxicology approaches to assess the androgenic potential of chemicals. J Chem Inf Model. 2017;57(11):2874–2884. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00420
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trisciuzzi D, Alberga D, Mansouri K, et al. Docking-based classification models for exploratory toxicology studies on high-quality estrogenic experimental data. Future Med Chem. 2015;7(14):1921–1936. doi: 10.4155/fmc.15.103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trisciuzzi D, Alberga D, Leonetti F, et al. Molecular Docking for Predictive Toxicology. Methods Mol Biol. 2018;1800:181–197.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Raies AB, Bajic VB. In silico toxicology: computational methods for the prediction of chemical toxicity. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Mol Sci. 2016;6(2):147–172. doi: 10.1002/wcms.1240
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EMA. ICH S5 (R3) Guideline on detection of reproductive and developmental toxicity for human pharmaceuticals - Scientific guideline. EMA/CHMP/ICH/544278/1998 Feb 18, 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Alberga D, Trisciuzzi D, Mansouri K, et al. Prediction of acute oral systemic toxicity using a multifingerprint similarity approach. Toxicol Sci. 2019;167(2):484–495. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfy255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. Test No. 414: prenatal developmental toxicity study. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Hougaard KS. Next generation reproductive and developmental toxicology: crosstalk into the future. Front Toxicol. 2021;3:3. doi: 10.3389/ftox.2021.652571
   Google Scholar
• Štefanac T, Grgas D, Landeka Dragičević T. Xenobiotics—Division and methods of detection: a review. J Xenobiot. 2021;11(4):130–141. doi: 10.3390/jox11040009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grandjean P, Landrigan PJ. Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13(3):330–338. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70278-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schildroth S, Kordas K, Bauer JA, et al. Environmental metal exposure, neurodevelopment, and the role of iron status: a review. Curr Environ Health Rep. 2022;9(4):758–787. doi: 10.1007/s40572-022-00378-0
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Holmes LB. Memories of the Teratology Society: 1972–2020. Birth Defects Res. 2020;112(12):935–941. doi: 10.1002/bdr2.1667
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li M, Gong J, Gao L, et al. Advanced human developmental toxicity and teratogenicity assessment using human organoid models. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2022;235:113429. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2022.113429
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepard TH, Lemire RJ. Catalog of teratogenic agents. Baltimore (MD): JHU Press; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Koch WE, Koch BA, Martin AH, et al. Examination of the development of chicken embryos following exposure to magnetic fields. Comp Biochem Physiol A: Physiol. 1993;105(4):617–624. doi: 10.1016/0300-9629(93)90261-2
   Google Scholar
• Vetter M, Oskouian RJ, Tubbs RS. Contributions to our modern understanding of spina bifida: Camille Dareste (1822–1899). Childs Nerv Syst. 2020;36(2):225–226. doi: 10.1007/s00381-018-3759-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavlock JMR, Roben J. Developmental Toxicology. Reproductive and developmental toxicology. Korach KS, editor. Ney York, USA: CRC Press; 1998. p. 47–72.
   Google Scholar
• Woolf AD. Chapter 2.4 - Thalidomide tragedy, 1950s. In: Woolf A, editor. History of modern clinical toxicology. Academic Press; 2022. p. 165–175. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780128222188000582?via%3Dihub
   Google Scholar
• Collins TFX. History and evolution of reproductive and developmental toxicology guidelines. Curr Pharm Des. 2006;12(12):1449–1465. doi: 10.2174/138161206776389813
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brent RL. Utilization of animal studies to determine the effects and human risks of environmental toxicants (drugs, chemicals, and physical agents). Pediatrics. 2004;113(Supplement_3):984–995. doi: 10.1542/peds.113.S3.984
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rovida C, Longo F, Rabbit RR. How are reproductive toxicity and developmental toxicity addressed in REACH dossiers? Anim. Exp - Altern. ALTEX. 2011;28(4):273–294. doi: 10.14573/altex.2011.4.273
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kaplan YC, Demir O. Use of phenytoin, Phenobarbital Carbamazepine, Levetiracetam Lamotrigine and valproate in pregnancy and breastfeeding: risk of Major Malformations, dose-dependency, monotherapy vs polytherapy, pharmacokinetics and clinical implications. Curr Neuropharmacol. 2021;19(11):1805–1824. doi: 10.2174/1570159X19666210211150856
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pizzo F, Gadaleta D, Lombardo A, et al. Identification of structural alerts for liver and kidney toxicity using repeated dose toxicity data. Chem Cent J. 2015;9(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s13065-015-0139-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roi AJ, Kolar R. Chapter 4.2 - Dissemination of information on alternative methods: databases and systems. In: Balls M, Combes R, and Worth A, editors The History of alternative test methods in toxicology. Academic Press, Elsevier; 2019. p. 253–261. https://shop.elsevier.com/books/the-history-of-alternative-test-methods-in-toxicology/balls/978-0-12-813697-3
   Google Scholar
• Niethammer M, Burgdorf T, Wistorf E, et al. In vitro models of human development and their potential application in developmental toxicity testing. Development. 2022;149(20):dev200933. doi: 10.1242/dev.200933
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurosawa H. Methods for inducing embryoid body formation: in vitro differentiation system of embryonic stem cells. J Biosci Bioeng. 2007;103(5):389–398. doi: 10.1263/jbb.103.389
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu H, Ren C, Liu W, et al. Embryotoxicity estimation of commonly used compounds with embryonic stem cell test. Mol Med Rep. 2017;16(1):263–271. doi: 10.3892/mmr.2017.6552
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitlow S, Bürgin H, Clemann N. The embryonic stem cell test for the early selection of pharmaceutical compounds. ALTEX - Altern Anim Exp. 2007;24:3–7. doi: 10.14573/altex.2007.1.3
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• OECD. Guidance document on the reporting of defined approaches to be used within integrated approaches to testing and assessment. OECD; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• ECHA - European Chemicals Agency. Availabe from: https://echa.europa.eu/it/
   Google Scholar
• US EPA - Environmental Protection Agency. Availabe from: https://www.epa.gov/
   Google Scholar
• Branch LS Consolidated federal laws of Canada, Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Bercu J, Masuda‐Herrera MJ, Trejo-Martin A, et al. A cross-industry collaboration to assess if acute oral toxicity (Q)SAR models are fit-for-purpose for GHS classification and labelling. Environ Chem Ecotoxicol. 2021;120:104843. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104843
   Google Scholar
• Classification and labelling (CLP/GHS) - Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test (OECD TG 421) and Combined Repeated Dose Toxicity Study with the Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test (OECD TG 422). Paris: OECD; 2018. p. 515–529.
   Google Scholar
• Test No. 443: Extended One-Generation Reproductive Toxicity Study. OECD.
   Google Scholar
• ICH S6 (R1) Preclinical safety evaluation of biotechnology-derived pharmaceuticals. European Medicines Agency. 2018.
   Google Scholar
• EMA. EMA, Scientific guidelines [Internet]. European Medicines Agency. 2018. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/research-development/scientific-guidelines
   Google Scholar
• Scialli AR. The challenge of reproductive and developmental toxicology under REACH. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2008;51(2):244–250. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2008.04.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang H, Ren J-X, Kang Y-L, et al. Development of novel in silico model for developmental toxicity assessment by using naïve Bayes classifier method. Reprod Toxicol. 2017;71:8–15. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2017.04.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huggins J. Alternatives to animal testing: Research, trends, validation, regulatory acceptance. ALTEX - Altern Anim Exp. 2003;20:3–61.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gissi A, Lombardo A, Roncaglioni A, et al. Evaluation and comparison of benchmark QSAR models to predict a relevant REACH endpoint: The bioconcentration factor (BCF). Environ Res. 2015;137:398–409. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2014.12.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Planchart A, Mattingly CJ, Allen D, et al. Advancing toxicology research using in vivo high throughput toxicology with small fish models. ALTEX - Altern Anim Exp. 2016;33:435–452. doi: 10.14573/altex.1601281
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rai M, Singh AV, Paudel N, et al. Herbal concoction Unveiled: A computational analysis of phytochemicals’ pharmacokinetic and toxicological profiles using novel approach methodologies (NAMs). Curr Res Toxicol. 2023;5:100118. doi: 10.1016/j.crtox.2023.100118
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mangiatordi GF, Alberga D, Altomare CD, et al. Mind the Gap! A Journey towards computational toxicology. Mol Inf. 2016;35(8–9):294–308. doi: 10.1002/minf.201501017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolotti O, Benfenati E, Carotti A, et al. REACH and in silico methods: an attractive opportunity for medicinal chemists. Drug Discov Today. 2014;19(11):1757–1768. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2014.06.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marahrens M, Kleinschmidt N, Di Nardo A, et al. Risk assessment in animal welfare – Especially referring to animal transport. Prev Vet Med. 2011;102(2):157–163. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.04.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker RA, Bianchi E, LaRocca J, et al. Identifying the landscape of developmental toxicity new approach methodologies. Birth Defects Res. 2022;114(17):1123–1137. doi: 10.1002/bdr2.2075
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rovida C. Internationalization of read-across as a validated new approach method (NAM) for regulatory toxicology. ALTEX - Altern Anim Exp. 2020. doi: 10.14573/altex.1912181
   Google Scholar
• Avila AM, Bebenek I, Bonzo JA, et al. An FDA/CDER perspective on nonclinical testing strategies: Classical toxicology approaches and new approach methodologies (NAMs). Environ Chem Ecotoxicol. 2020;114:104662. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104662
   Google Scholar
• Roy A, Nair S, Sen N, et al. In silico methods for design of biological therapeutics. Methods. 2017;131:33–65. doi: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2017.09.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberga D, Gambacorta N, Trisciuzzi D, et al. De Novo Drug design of targeted chemical libraries based on artificial intelligence and pair-based multiobjective optimization. J Chem Inf Model. 2020;60:4582–4593. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00517
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolotti O, Catto M, Giangreco I, et al. Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of 5-hydroxy, 5-substituted-pyrimidine-2,4,6-triones as potent inhibitors of gelatinases MMP-2 and MMP-9. Eur J Med Chem. 2012;58:368–376. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2012.09.036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roncaglioni A, Toropov AA, Toropova AP, et al. In silico methods to predict drug toxicity. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2013;13(5):802–806. doi: 10.1016/j.coph.2013.06.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanton K, Kruszewski FH. Quantifying the benefits of using read-across and in silico techniques to fulfill hazard data requirements for chemical categories. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2016;81:250–259. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.09.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marzo M, Kulkarni S, Manganaro A, et al. Integrating in silico models to enhance predictivity for developmental toxicity. Toxicology. 2016;370:127–137. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2016.09.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pizzo F, Lombardo A, Brandt M, et al. A new integrated in silico strategy for the assessment and prioritization of persistence of chemicals under REACH. Environ Int. 2016;88:250–260. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2015.12.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombardo A, Pizzo F, Benfenati E, et al. A new in silico classification model for ready biodegradability, based on molecular fragments. Chemosphere. 2014;108:10–16. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.02.073
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lilienblum W, Dekant W, Foth H, et al. Alternative methods to safety studies in experimental animals: role in the risk assessment of chemicals under the new European chemicals Legislation (REACH). Arch Toxicol. 2008;82(4):211–236. doi: 10.1007/s00204-008-0279-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gambacorta N, Trisciuzzi D, Ciriaco F, et al. Chapter 26 - Machine learning resources for drug design. In: Roy K, editor. Cheminformatics, QSAR and machine learning applications for novel drug development. Academic Press, Elsevier; 2023. p. 663–678. https://shop.elsevier.com/books/cheminformatics-qsar-and-machine-learning-applications-for-novel-drug-development/roy/978-0-443-18638-7
   Google Scholar
• Pattnaik PK, Rautaray SS, Das H, et al. editors. Progress in computing, analytics and networking. Singapore: Springer; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Mak K-K, Pichika MR. Artificial intelligence in drug development: present status and future prospects. Drug Discov Today. 2019;24(3):773–780. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2018.11.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolotti O, Miscioscia TF, Leonetti F, et al. Screening of matrix metalloproteinases available from the Protein data Bank: insights into biological functions, Domain Organization, and zinc binding groups. J Chem Inf Model. 2007;47(6):2439–2448. doi: 10.1021/ci700119r
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin Z, Chou W-C. Machine learning and Artificial intelligence in toxicological sciences. Toxicol Sci. 2022;189(1):7–19. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfac075
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee J. Artificial Intelligence and International Law. Singapore: Springer Nature; 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Singh AV, Bansod G, Mahajan M, et al. Digital transformation in toxicology: improving communication and efficiency in risk assessment. ACS Omega. 2023;8(24):21377–21390. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.3c00596
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bron EE, Smits M, van der Flier WM, et al. Standardized evaluation of algorithms for computer-aided diagnosis of dementia based on structural MRI: the CADDementia challenge. Neuroimage. 2015;111:562–579. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.01.048
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amoroso N, Diacono D, Fanizzi A, et al. Deep learning reveals Alzheimer’s disease onset in MCI subjects: results from an international challenge. J Neurosci Methods. 2018;302:3–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.12.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choobdar S, Ahsen ME, Crawford J, et al. Assessment of network module identification across complex diseases. Nat Methods. 2019;16(9):843–852. doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0509-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FAIR Principles. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/
   Google Scholar
• Tox21 Data Challenge 2014. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://tripod.nih.gov/tox21/challenge/
   Google Scholar
• Meyer P, Saez-Rodriguez J. Advances in systems biology modeling: 10 years of crowdsourcing DREAM challenges. Cell Syst. 2021;12(6):636–653. doi: 10.1016/j.cels.2021.05.015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaggle: Your machine learning and data science community. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://www.kaggle.com/
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Luna J, Grisoni F, Weskamp N, et al. Artificial intelligence in drug discovery: recent advances and future perspectives. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2021;16(9):949–959. doi: 10.1080/17460441.2021.1909567
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu T, Cao S, Su P-C, et al. Hit identification and optimization in virtual screening: practical recommendations based on a critical literature analysis. J Med Chem. 2013;56(17):6560–6572. doi: 10.1021/jm301916b
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang S, Kar S. Application of artificial intelligence and machine learning in early detection of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and drug-induced toxicity. Artif Intell Chem. 2023;1(2):100011. doi: 10.1016/j.aichem.2023.100011
   Google Scholar
• Lavecchia A. Machine-learning approaches in drug discovery: methods and applications. Drug Discov Today. 2015;20(3):318–331. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2014.10.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trisciuzzi D, Siragusa L, Baroni M, et al. Getting insights into structural and energetic properties of reciprocal peptide–protein interactions. J Chem Inf Model. 2022;62(4):1113–1125. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.1c01343
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trisciuzzi D, Siragusa L, Baroni M, et al. An integrated machine learning model to spot peptide binding pockets in 3D protein screening. J Chem Inf Model. 2022;62(24):6812–6824. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.2c00583
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh AV, Varma M, Laux P, et al. Artificial intelligence and machine learning disciplines with the potential to improve the nanotoxicology and nanomedicine fields: a comprehensive review. Arch Toxicol. 2023;97(4):963–979. doi: 10.1007/s00204-023-03471-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Challa AP, Beam AL, Shen M, et al. Machine learning on drug-specific data to predict small molecule teratogenicity. Reprod Toxicol. 2020;95:148–158. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2020.05.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahesh B. Machine learning algorithms - a review. Int j sci res. 2020Jan;9(1):381–386.
   Google Scholar
• Monaco A, Pantaleo E, Amoroso N, et al. A primer on machine learning techniques for genomic applications. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2021;19:4345–4359. doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2021.07.021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunčar G, Kukar M, Notar M, et al. An application of machine learning to haematological diagnosis. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):411. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18564-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koohy H. The rise and fall of machine learning methods in biomedical research. F1000Res. 2018;6:2012. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.13016.2
   Google Scholar
• Chen H, Engkvist O, Wang Y, et al. The rise of deep learning in drug discovery. Drug Discov Today. 2018;23(6):1241–1250. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2018.01.039
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan RK, Liu Y, Xie L. Reinforcement learning for systems pharmacology-oriented and personalized drug design. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2022;17(8):849–863. doi: 10.1080/17460441.2022.2072288
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh AV, Rosenkranz D, Ansari MHD, et al. Artificial intelligence and machine learning empower advanced biomedical material design to toxicity prediction. Adv Intell Syst. 2020;2(12):2000084. doi: 10.1002/aisy.202000084
   Google Scholar
• Schultz TW, Cronin M, Walker J, et al. Quantitative structure–activity relationships (QSARs) in toxicology: a historical perspective. J Mol Struct Theochem. 2003;622(1–2):1–22. doi: 10.1016/S0166-1280(02)00614-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolotti O, Carotti A. QSAR and QSPR studies of a highly structured physicochemical domain. J Chem Inf Model. 2006;46(1):264–276. doi: 10.1021/ci050293l
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciriaco F, Gambacorta N, Trisciuzzi D, et al. PLATO: a predictive drug discovery web platform for efficient target fishing and bioactivity profiling of small molecules. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(9):5245. doi: 10.3390/ijms23095245
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Consonni V, Todeschini R. Molecular Descriptors. In: Puzyn T, Leszczynski J, Cronin M, editors. Recent Advances in QSAR Studies. Challenges and Advances in Computational Chemistry and Physics; 2010. Vol. 8. Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9783-6_3
   Google Scholar
• Nicolotti O, editor. Computational toxicology: methods and protocols. NY (NY): Springer; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Varnek A, Baskin I. Machine learning methods for property prediction in Chemoinformatics: Quo Vadis? J Chem Inf Model. 2012;52(6):1413–1437. doi: 10.1021/ci200409x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maltarollo VG, Gertrudes JC, Oliveira PR, et al. Applying machine learning techniques for ADME-Tox prediction: a review. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2015;11(2):259–271. doi: 10.1517/17425255.2015.980814
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grégoire G. Multiple Linear Regression. Eur Astron Soc Publ Ser. 2014;66:45–72. doi: 10.1051/eas/1466005
   Google Scholar
• Zhang Y-H, Xia Z-N, Yan L, et al. Prediction of placental barrier permeability: A model based on partial least squares variable selection procedure. Molecules. 2015;20(5):8270–8286. doi: 10.3390/molecules20058270
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rish I. An empirical study of the naive Bayes classifier. IJCAI-2001 Work Empir Methods AI. [Internet]. IBM Tech Rep RC22230; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson L. K-nearest neighbour. Scholarpedia. 2009;4(2):1883. doi: 10.4249/scholarpedia.1883
   Google Scholar
• Togo MV, Mastrolorito F, Ciriaco F, et al. TIRESIA: An eXplainable artificial intelligence platform for predicting developmental toxicity. J Chem Inf Model. 2022;63:56–66. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.2c01126
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta B, Rawat A, Jain A, et al. Analysis of various decision tree algorithms for classification in data mining. IJCA. 2017;163(8):15–19. doi: 10.5120/ijca2017913660
   Google Scholar
• Zhou Z-H. Ensemble Learning. In: Zhou Z-H, editor. Machine Learning. Singapore: Springer; 2021. p. 181–210.
   Google Scholar
• Parmar A, Katariya R, Patel V A review on random forest: an ensemble classifier. In: Hemanth J, Fernando X Lafata P, editors International Conference on Intelligent Data Communication Technologies and Internet of Things (ICICI) 2018. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. p. 758–763.
   Google Scholar
• Sekhar CR, Minal ME. Mode choice analysis using random forest decision trees. Transp Res Procedia. 2016;17:644–652. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2016.11.119
   Google Scholar
• Wright LG, Onodera T, Stein MM, et al. Deep physical neural networks trained with backpropagation. Nature. 2022;601(7894):549–555. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-04223-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burden F, Winkler D. Bayesian regularization of neural networks. Methods Mol Biol. 2008;458:25–44.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bengio Y, Courville A, Vincent P. Representation learning: a review and new perspectives. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2013;35(8):1798–1828. doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2013.50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsay GW. Convolutional neural networks as a Model of the visual system: past, present, and future. J Cognitive Neurosci. 2021;33(10):2017–2031. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_01544
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Segler MHS, Kogej T, Tyrchan C, et al. Generating focused molecule libraries for drug discovery with recurrent neural networks. ACS Cent Sci. 2018;4(1):120–131. doi: 10.1021/acscentsci.7b00512
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arthur D, Vassilvitskii S K-Means++: The advantages of careful seeding. Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. USA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics; 2007. p. 1027–1035.
   Google Scholar
• Rifaioglu AS, Atas H, Martin MJ, et al. Recent applications of deep learning and machine intelligence on in silico drug discovery: methods, tools and databases. Brief Bioinform. 2019;20(5):1878–1912. doi: 10.1093/bib/bby061
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krogh A. What are artificial neural networks? Nature Biotechnol. 2008;26(2):195–197. doi: 10.1038/nbt1386
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HB C, Luthra H, Ankur. Impact of machine learning practices on biomedical informatics, its challenges and future benefits. In: Artificial intelligence technologies for computational biology. CRC Press; 2022. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9781003246688-12/impact-machine-learning-practices-biomedical-informatics-challenges-future-benefits-hina-bansal-hiya-luthra-ankur-chaurasia
   Google Scholar
• Pantic I, Paunovic J, Cumic J, et al. Artificial neural networks in contemporary toxicology research. Chem Biol Interact. 2023;369:110269. doi: 10.1016/j.cbi.2022.110269
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muster W, Breidenbach A, Fischer H, et al. Computational toxicology in drug development. Drug Discov Today. 2008;13(7–8):303–310. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2007.12.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciallella HL, Russo DP, Sharma S, et al. Predicting prenatal developmental toxicity based on the combination of chemical structures and biological data. Environ Sci Technol. 2022;56(9):5984–5998. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.2c01040
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worth A, Lo PE, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection. Review of QSAR models and software tools for predicting developmental and reproductive toxicity. Publications Office. 2010. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2788/9628
   Google Scholar
• Hewitt M, Ellison CM, Enoch SJ, et al. Integrating (Q)SAR models, expert systems and read-across approaches for the prediction of developmental toxicity. Reprod Toxicol. 2010;30(1):147–160. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2009.12.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Worth A, Fuart GM, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection. Review of software tools for toxicity prediction. Publications Office; 2010. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2788/60101
   Google Scholar
• Arvidson KB. FDA toxicity databases and real-time data entry. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2008;233(1):17–19. doi: 10.1016/j.taap.2007.12.033
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews EJ, Kruhlak NL, Daniel Benz R, et al. A comprehensive model for reproductive and developmental toxicity hazard identification: I. Development of a weight of evidence QSAR database. Environ Chem Ecotoxicol. 2007;47(2):115–135. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2006.11.002
   Google Scholar
• ToxRefDB - Release user-friendly web-based tool for mining ToxRefDB |. Available from: https://cfpub.epa.gov/
   Google Scholar
• US EPA O. Distributed Structure-Searchable Toxicity (DSSTox) Database. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/chemical-research/distributed-structure-searchable-toxicity-dsstox-database
   Google Scholar
• Sussman NB, Arena VC, Yu S, et al. Decision tree SAR models for developmental toxicity based on an FDA/TERIS database. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2003;14(2):83–96. doi: 10.1080/1062936031000073126
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wexler P. TOXNET: an evolving web resource for toxicology and environmental health information. Toxicology. 2001;157(1–2):3–10. doi: 10.1016/S0300-483X(00)00337-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judson R, Richard A, Dix D, et al. ACToR — Aggregated computational toxicology resource. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2008;233(1):7–13. doi: 10.1016/j.taap.2007.12.037
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim S, Thiessen PA, Bolton EE, et al. PubChem substance and compound databases. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(D1):D1202–D1213. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkv951
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TERIS - The Teratogen Information System. [cited 2023 Jul 12].
   Google Scholar
• Software to predict toxicity | Safety endpoints calculator | Tox Suite | ACD/Labs. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://www.acdlabs.com/products/percepta-platform/tox-suite/
   Google Scholar
• CAESAR. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: http://www.caesar-project.eu/-
   Google Scholar
• Lhasa Limited | Shared Knowledge, Shared Progress. Available from: https://www.lhasalimited.org/
   Google Scholar
• QSAR Toolbox. QSAR Toolbox. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://qsartoolbox.org/
   Google Scholar
• Home - MultiCASE. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://multicase.com/-
   Google Scholar
• TopKat® - Toxit. [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://www.toxit.it/en/services/software/topkat
   Google Scholar
• US EPA, ORCD. Toxicity Estimation Software Tool (TEST). [cited 2023 Jul 12]. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/chemical-research/toxicity-estimation-software-tool-test
   Google Scholar
• Maunz A, Gütlein M, Rautenberg M, et al. lazar: a modular predictive toxicology framework. Front Pharmacol. 2013;4:4. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2013.00038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanco-González A, Cabezón A, Seco-González A, et al. The Role of AI in drug discovery: challenges, opportunities, and strategies. Pharmaceuticals. 2023;16(6):891. doi: 10.3390/ph16060891
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schenk B, Weimer M, Bremer S, et al. The ReProTect feasibility study, a novel comprehensive in vitro approach to detect reproductive toxicants. Reprod Toxicol. 2010;30(1):200–218. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2010.05.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mistry P, Neagu D, Trundle PR, et al. Using random forest and decision tree models for a new vehicle prediction approach in computational toxicology. Soft Comput. 2016;20(8):2967–2979. doi: 10.1007/s00500-015-1925-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arena VC, Sussman NB, Mazumdar S, et al. The Utility of Structure–Activity Relationship (SAR) models for prediction and covariate selection in developmental toxicity: comparative analysis of logistic regression and decision tree models. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2004;15(1):1–18. doi: 10.1080/1062936032000169633
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson J, Johnson K, Chapin R, et al. Not a walk in the park: the ECVAM whole embryo culture model challenged with pharmaceuticals and attempted improvements with random forest design. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol. 2011;92:111–121. doi: 10.1002/bdrb.20289
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassano A, Manganaro A, Martin T, et al. CAESAR models for developmental toxicity. Chem Cent J. 2010;4(S1):S4. doi: 10.1186/1752-153X-4-S1-S4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gissi A, Gadaleta D, Floris M, et al. An alternative QSAR-based approach for predicting the bioconcentration factor for regulatory purposes. ALTEX - Altern Anim Exp. 2014;31:23–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunturi SB, Ramamurthi N. A novel approach to generate robust classification models to predict developmental toxicity from imbalanced datasets. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2014;25(9):711–727. doi: 10.1080/1062936X.2014.942357
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olawoyin R. Application of backpropagation artificial neural network prediction model for the PAH bioremediation of polluted soil. Chemosphere. 2016;161:145–150. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.07.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carney MW, Erwin K, Hardman R, et al. Differential developmental toxicity of naphthoic acid isomers in medaka (oryzias latipes) embryos. Mar Pollut Bull. 2008;57(6–12):255–266. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2008.02.036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marzo M, Benfenati E. Classification of a Naïve Bayesian Fingerprint model to predict reproductive toxicity $. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2018;29(8):631–645. doi: 10.1080/1062936X.2018.1499125
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang H, Mao J, Qi H-Z, et al. In silico prediction of drug-induced developmental toxicity by using machine learning approaches. Mol Divers. 2020;24(4):1281–1290. doi: 10.1007/s11030-019-09991-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavado GJ, Gadaleta D, Toma C, et al. Zebrafish AC50 modelling: (Q)SAR models to predict developmental toxicity in zebrafish embryo. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020;202:110936. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.110936
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavado GJ, Baderna D, Carnesecchi E, et al. QSAR models for soil ecotoxicity: Development and validation of models to predict reproductive toxicity of organic chemicals in the collembola Folsomia candida. J Hazard Mater. 2022;423:127236. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127236
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• eChemportal OECD. The Global Portal To Information On Chemical Substances. Available from: https://www.echemportal.org/echemportal/
   Google Scholar
• Jiang C, Yang H, Di P, et al. In silico prediction of chemical reproductive toxicity using machine learning. J Appl Toxicol. 2019;39(6):844–854. doi: 10.1002/jat.3772
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molecular Operating Environment (MOE) | MOEsaic | PSILO.
   Google Scholar
• Kelleci Çelik F, Karaduman G. In silico QSAR modeling to predict the safe use of antibiotics during pregnancy. Drug Chem Toxicol. 2023;46(5):962–971. doi: 10.1080/01480545.2022.2113888
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang P, Henle EA, Fern XZ, et al. Classifying the toxicity of pesticides to honey bees via support vector machines with random walk graph kernels. J Chem Phys. 2022;157(3):034102. doi: 10.1063/5.0090573
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chou C-Y, Lin P, Kim J, et al. Ensemble learning for predicting ex vivo human placental barrier permeability. BMC Bioinf. 2022;22(S10):629. doi: 10.1186/s12859-022-04937-y
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bryce TJ, Dewhirst MW, Floyd CE, et al. Artificial neural network model of survival in patients treated with irradiation with and without concurrent chemotherapy for advanced carcinoma of the head and neck. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;41(2):339–345. doi: 10.1016/S0360-3016(98)00016-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hruba H, Abdelsalam EEE, Anisimov N, et al. Reproductive toxicity of fluoroquinolones in birds. BMC Vet Res. 2019;15(1):209. doi: 10.1186/s12917-019-1957-y
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Adadi A, Berrada M. Peeking inside the black-box: a survey on explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). IEEE Access. 2018;6:52138–52160. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2870052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Luna J, Grisoni F, Schneider G. Drug discovery with explainable artificial intelligence. Nat Mach Intell. 2020;2(10):573–584. doi: 10.1038/s42256-020-00236-4
   Google Scholar
• Tjoa E, Guan C. A survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): toward medical XAI. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learning Syst. 2021;32(11):4793–4813. doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2020.3027314
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wellawatte GP, Gandhi HA, Seshadri A, et al. A perspective on explanations of molecular prediction models. J Chem Theory Comput. 2023;19(8):2149–2160. doi: 10.1021/acs.jctc.2c01235
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeborough W, van Zyl T. Investigating explainability methods in recurrent neural network architectures for financial time series data. Appl Sci. 2022;12(3):1427. doi: 10.3390/app12031427
   Google Scholar
• Boobier S, Osbourn A, Mitchell JBO. Can human experts predict solubility better than computers? J Cheminform. 2017;9(1):63. doi: 10.1186/s13321-017-0250-y
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heberle H, Zhao L, Schmidt S, et al. XSMILES: interactive visualization for molecules, SMILES and XAI attribution scores. J Cheminform. 2023;15(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s13321-022-00673-w
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brasse J, Broder HR, Förster M, et al. Explainable artificial intelligence in information systems: A review of the status quo and future research directions. Electron Markets. 2023;33(1):26. doi: 10.1007/s12525-023-00644-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iswarya B, Manimekalai K. Drug discovery with XAI using deep learning. In: Principles and methods of explainable artificial intelligence in healthcare. IGI Global; 2022. p. 19. doi: 10.4018/978-1-6684-3791-9.ch006
   Google Scholar
• Nicolotti O, Gillet VJ, Fleming PJ, et al. Multiobjective Optimization in Quantitative Structure−Activity Relationships: Deriving Accurate and Interpretable QSARs. J Med Chem. 2002;45(23):5069–5080. doi: 10.1021/jm020919o
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolotti O, Giangreco I, Introcaso A, et al. Strategies of multi-objective optimization in drug discovery and development. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2011;6(9):871–884. doi: 10.1517/17460441.2011.588696
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gambacorta N, Ciriaco F, Amoroso N, et al. CIRCE: web-based platform for the prediction of cannabinoid receptor ligands using explainable machine learning. J Chem Inf Model. 2023;63(18):5916–5926. doi: 10.1021/acs.jcim.3c00914
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waddah S, Christian O. Explainable AI (XAI): A systematic meta-survey of current challenges and future opportunities. Knowledge-Based Systems. 2023;263:110273. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2023.110273
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mele M, Imbrici P, Mele A, et al. Short-term anti-remodeling effects of gliflozins in diabetic patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: an explainable artificial intelligence approach. Front Pharmacol. 2023;14:1175606. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1175606
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Stefano M, Galati S, Piazza L, et al. VenomPred 2.0: A novel in silico platform for an extended and human interpretable toxicological profiling of small molecules. J Chem Inf Model. 2023. doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.3c00692
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu S, Fisher J, Naciff J, et al. Framework for identifying chemicals with structural features associated with the potential to act as developmental or reproductive toxicants. Chem Res Toxicol. 2013;26(12):1840–1861. doi: 10.1021/tx400226u
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landrum G RDKit |. 2010. [cited Jul 12, 2023]. Available from: https://www.rdkit.org/-
   Google Scholar
• Moriwaki H, Tian Y-S, Kawashita N, et al. Mordred: a molecular descriptor calculator. J Cheminform. 2018;10(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s13321-018-0258-y
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shapley LS. A Value for n-Person Games. In: Kuhn H, Tucker A, editors. Contributions to the Theory of Games II. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1953. p. 307–318. doi: 10.1515/9781400881970-018
   Google Scholar
• Guo J, Liu K, Yang J, et al. Prenatal exposure to bisphenol a and neonatal health outcomes: A systematic review. Environ Pollut. 2023;335:122295. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2023.122295
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomson T, Battino D, Bonizzoni E, et al. Comparative risk of major congenital malformations with eight different antiepileptic drugs: a prospective cohort study of the EURAP registry. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(6):530–538. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30107-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levita J, Wilar G, Wahyuni I, et al. Clinical Toxicology of Vitamin D in Pediatrics: A Review and Case Reports. Toxics. 2023;11(7):642. doi: 10.3390/toxics11070642
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bookstaver PB, Bland CM, Griffin B, et al. A review of Antibiotic use in pregnancy. Pharmacotherapy. 2015;35(11):1052–1062. doi: 10.1002/phar.1649
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rai M, Paudel N, Sakhrie M, et al. Perspective on Quantitative Structure–Toxicity Relationship (QSTR) models to predict hepatic biotransformation of xenobiotics. Livers. 2023;3(3):448–462. doi: 10.3390/livers3030032
   Google Scholar
• Öztürk H, Özgür A, Schwaller P, et al. Exploring chemical space using natural language processing methodologies for drug discovery. Drug Discov Today. 2020;25(4):689–705. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2020.01.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cadeddu A, Wylie EK, Jurczak J, et al. Organic chemistry as a language and the implications of chemical linguistics for structural and retrosynthetic analyses. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2014;53(31):8108–8112. doi: 10.1002/anie.201403708
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humer C, Heberle H, Montanari F, et al. ChemInformatics Model Explorer (CIME): exploratory analysis of chemical model explanations. J Cheminform. 2022;14(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s13321-022-00600-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shtar G, Rokach L, Shapira B, et al. Explainable multimodal machine learning model for classifying pregnancy drug safety. Bioinformatics. 2022;38(4):1102–1109. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btab769
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh AV, Chandrasekar V, Paudel N, et al. Integrative toxicogenomics: Advancing precision medicine and toxicology through artificial intelligence and OMICs technology. Biomed Pharmacother. 2023;163:114784. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2023.114784
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amoroso N, Gambacorta N, Mastrolorito F, et al. Making sense of chemical space network shows signs of criticality. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):21335. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-48107-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar