Predictive Modeling of Chemical Hazard by Integrating Numerical Descriptors of Chemical Structures and Short-term Toxicity Assay Data

Abstract

Quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models are widely used for in silico prediction of in vivo toxicity of drug candidates or environmental chemicals, adding value to candidate selection in drug development or in a search for less hazardous and more sustainable alternatives for chemicals in commerce. The development of traditional QSAR models is enabled by numerical descriptors representing the inherent chemical properties that can be easily defined for any number of molecules; however, traditional QSAR models often have limited predictive power due to the lack of data and complexity of in vivo endpoints. Although it has been indeed difficult to obtain experimentally derived toxicity data on a large number of chemicals in the past, the results of quantitative in vitro screening of thousands of environmental chemicals in hundreds of experimental systems are now available and continue to accumulate. In addition, publicly accessible toxicogenomics data collected on hundreds of chemicals provide another dimension of molecular information that is potentially useful for predictive toxicity modeling. These new characteristics of molecular bioactivity arising from short-term biological assays, i.e., in vitro screening and/or in vivo toxicogenomics data can now be exploited in combination with chemical structural information to generate hybrid QSAR-like quantitative models to predict human toxicity and carcinogenicity. Using several case studies, we illustrate the benefits of a hybrid modeling approach, namely improvements in the accuracy of models, enhanced interpretation of the most predictive features, and expanded applicability domain for wider chemical space coverage.

A testing strategy to predict risk for drug-induced liver injury in humans using high-content screen assays and the ‘rule-of-two’ model

“…Obviously, a single model derived from in silico or in vitro testing alone is insufficient for the prediction of a complicated endpoint like DILI; meanwhile, an appropriate integration can improve the predictive performance, mostly because models based on different systems capture a greater diversity of information (Chen et al 2014) (Rusyn et al 2012). For example, only 6 of 27 (22 %) positives predicted by the RO2 or HCS assay were common in this study, suggesting that these two models are complementary.…”

CompoundProtein Interaction Prediction Within Chemogenomics: Theoretical Concepts, Practical Usage, and Future Directions

“…Second, while molecule descriptors have primarily been designed for a single molecular species, namely compounds and proteins, it remains a challenge and open topic to create molecule descriptors specifically designed for chemogenomics, rather than static descriptors of each molecule. Here, a mixture of assay fingerprints [85,86] (for example, Figure 2) combined with existing methods may prove informative for both compound-and target-driven chemogenomics projects.…”

Making big sense from big data in toxicology by read-across

“…And this is not the only example: When different acceptable animal tests correspond only around 80% of the time, as shown for both acute oral toxicity (Luechtefeld et al, 2016b) and skin sensitization (Luechtefeld et al, 2016d), this measure agencies. They have stimulated many attempts to mine these data for predictive toxicity 2,3 (more general: Sun et al, 2012;Rusyn et al, 2012).…”