ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2012
A three-stage algorithm to make toxicologically relevant activity calls from quantitative high throughput screening data.
Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lessons learned from evaluating defined chemical mixtures in a high-throughput estrogen receptor assay system.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025Article
- The Tox21 10K Compound Library: Collaborative Chemistry Advancing Toxicology.Chemical research in toxicology · 2021Review
- Quality Control of Quantitative High Throughput Screening Data.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Article
- Estimating Potency in High-Throughput Screening Experiments by Maximizing the Rate of Change in Weighted Shannon Entropy.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Cell-Based High-Throughput Screening for Aromatase Inhibitors in the Tox21 10K Library.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2015Article
- A Data Analysis Pipeline Accounting for Artifacts in Tox21 Quantitative High-Throughput Screening Assays.Journal of biomolecular screening · 2015Article
- Quantitative high-throughput screening data analysis: challenges and recent advances.Drug discovery today · 2015Article
- Minimizing Systematic Errors in Quantitative High Throughput Screening Data Using Standardization, Background Subtraction, and Non-Parametric Regression.The journal of experimental secondary science · 2014Article
- Using weighted entropy to rank chemicals in quantitative high-throughput screening experiments.Journal of biomolecular screening · 2014Article
- Improving the human hazard characterization of chemicals: a Tox21 update.Environmental health perspectives · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe ability of a substance to induce a toxicological response is better understood by analyzing the response profile over a broad range of concentrations than at a single concentration. In vitro quantitative high throughput screening (qHTS) assays are multiple-concentration experiments with an important role in the National Toxicology Program's (NTP) efforts to advance toxicology from a predominantly observational science at the level of disease-specific models to a more predictive science based on broad inclusion of biological observations.
objectiveWe developed a systematic approach to classify substances from large-scale concentration-response data into statistically supported, toxicologically relevant activity categories.
methodsThe first stage of the approach finds active substances with robust concentration-response profiles within the tested concentration range. The second stage finds substances with activity at the lowest tested concentration not captured in the first stage. The third and final stage separates statistically significant (but not robustly statistically significant) profiles from responses that lack statistically compelling support (i.e., "inactives"). The performance of the proposed algorithm was evaluated with simulated qHTS data sets.
resultsThe proposed approach performed well for 14-point-concentration-response curves with typical levels of residual error (σ ≤ 25%) or when maximal response (|RMAX|) was > 25% of the positive control response. The approach also worked well in most cases for smaller sample sizes when |RMAX| ≥ 50%, even with as few as four data points.
conclusionsThe three-stage classification algorithm performed better than one-stage classification approaches based on overall F-tests, t-tests, or linear regression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.