ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2013
From QSAR to QSIIR: searching for enhanced computational toxicology models.
Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Advances in Omics, Computational Models, and Advanced Screening Methods for Drug Safety and Efficacy.Toxics · 2024Review
- Overview of processed excipients in ocular drug delivery: Opportunities so far and bottlenecks.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Novel computational models offer alternatives to animal testing for assessing eye irritation and corrosion potential of chemicals.Artificial intelligence in the life sciences · 2021Article
- Characterizing cleft palate toxicants using ToxCast data, chemical structure, and the biomedical literature.Birth defects research · 2020Article
- Microfluidic-Based Multi-Organ Platforms for Drug Discovery.Micromachines · 2016Review
- In silico toxicology: computational methods for the prediction of chemical toxicity.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational molecular science · 2016Review
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
Quantitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) is the most frequently used modeling approach to explore the dependency of biological, toxicological, or other types of activities/properties of chemicals on their molecular features. In the past two decades, QSAR modeling has been used extensively in drug discovery process. However, the predictive models resulted from QSAR studies have limited use for chemical risk assessment, especially for animal and human toxicity evaluations, due to the low predictivity of new compounds. To develop enhanced toxicity models with independently validated external prediction power, novel modeling protocols were pursued by computational toxicologists based on rapidly increasing toxicity testing data in recent years. This chapter reviews the recent effort in our laboratory to incorporate the biological testing results as descriptors in the toxicity modeling process. This effort extended the concept of QSAR to quantitative structure in vitro-in vivo relationship (QSIIR). The QSIIR study examples provided in this chapter indicate that the QSIIR models that based on the hybrid (biological and chemical) descriptors are indeed superior to the conventional QSAR models that only based on chemical descriptors for several animal toxicity endpoints. We believe that the applications introduced in this review will be of interest and value to researchers working in the field of computational drug discovery and environmental chemical risk assessment.
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.