ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2014
Estimation of acute oral toxicity in rat using local lazy learning.
Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing LDJournal of chemical health & safety · 2023Article
- Predicting Dose-Range Chemical Toxicity using Novel Hybrid Deep Machine-Learning Method.Toxics · 2022Article
- Principles and Procedures for Assessment of Acute Toxicity IncorporatingComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2022Article
- An evaluation of the performance of selected (Q)SARs/expert systems for predicting acute oral toxicity.Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2020Article
- Transitioning the Generalised Read-Across approach (GenRA) to quantitative predictions: A case study using acute oral toxicity data.Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2019Article
- Machine Learning Based Toxicity Prediction: From Chemical Structural Description to Transcriptome Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Review
- ADMET evaluation in drug discovery: 15. Accurate prediction of rat oral acute toxicity using relevance vector machine and consensus modeling.Journal of cheminformatics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute toxicity means the ability of a substance to cause adverse effects within a short period following dosing or exposure, which is usually the first step in the toxicological investigations of unknown substances. The median lethal dose, LD50, is frequently used as a general indicator of a substance's acute toxicity, and there is a high demand on developing non-animal-based prediction of LD50. Unfortunately, it is difficult to accurately predict compound LD50 using a single QSAR model, because the acute toxicity may involve complex mechanisms and multiple biochemical processes.
resultsIn this study, we reported the use of local lazy learning (LLL) methods, which could capture subtle local structure-toxicity relationships around each query compound, to develop LD50 prediction models: (a) local lazy regression (LLR): a linear regression model built using k neighbors; (b) SA: the arithmetical mean of the activities of k nearest neighbors; (c) SR: the weighted mean of the activities of k nearest neighbors; (d) GP: the projection point of the compound on the line defined by its two nearest neighbors. We defined the applicability domain (AD) to decide to what an extent and under what circumstances the prediction is reliable. In the end, we developed a consensus model based on the predicted values of individual LLL models, yielding correlation coefficients R(2) of 0.712 on a test set containing 2,896 compounds.
conclusionEncouraged by the promising results, we expect that our consensus LLL model of LD50 would become a useful tool for predicting acute toxicity. All models developed in this study are available via http://www.dddc.ac.cn/admetus.
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.