Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30933541›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2019

Nonanimal Models for Acute Toxicity Evaluations: Applying Data-Driven Profiling and Read-Across.

Daniel P Russo, Judy Strickland, Agnes L Karmaus, Wenyi Wang, Sunil Shende, Thomas Hartung, Lauren M Aleksunes, Hao Zhu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Comparing LDJournal of chemical health & safety · 2023
    Article
  15. Principles and Procedures for Assessment of Acute Toxicity IncorporatingComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2022
    Article
  16. Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence in Toxicological Sciences.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Daniel P Russo1 Center for Computational and Integrative Biology, Rutgers University , Camden, New Jersey, USA.
Judy Strickland2 Integrated Laboratory Systems (ILS) , Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Agnes L Karmaus2 Integrated Laboratory Systems (ILS) , Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.
Wenyi Wang1 Center for Computational and Integrative Biology, Rutgers University , Camden, New Jersey, USA.
Sunil Shende1 Center for Computational and Integrative Biology, Rutgers University , Camden, New Jersey, USA.
Thomas Hartung4 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT) , Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Lauren M Aleksunes6 Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy, Rutgers University , Piscataway, New Jersey, USA.
Hao Zhu1 Center for Computational and Integrative Biology, Rutgers University , Camden, New Jersey, USA.

Funding

Predictive Computational Acute Toxicity Modeling by Profiling Chemicals With PublR15ES023148 · NIEHS · RUTGERS THE STATE UNIV OF NJ CAMDEN · PI ZHU, HAO · 2013 to 2018
$941k
NIEHS NIH HHS HHSN273201500010CNIEHS NIH HHS R15 ES023148
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow-cost, high-throughput in vitro bioassays have potential as alternatives to animal models for toxicity testing. However, incorporating in vitro bioassays into chemical toxicity evaluations such as read-across requires significant data curation and analysis based on knowledge of relevant toxicity mechanisms, lowering the enthusiasm of using the massive amount of unstructured public data.

objectiveWe aimed to develop a computational method to automatically extract useful bioassay data from a public repository (i.e., PubChem) and assess its ability to predict animal toxicity using a novel bioprofile-based read-across approach.

methodsA training database containing 7,385 compounds with diverse rat acute oral toxicity data was searched against PubChem to establish in vitro bioprofiles. Using a novel subspace clustering algorithm, bioassay groups that may inform on relevant toxicity mechanisms underlying acute oral toxicity were identified. These bioassays groups were used to predict animal acute oral toxicity using read-across through a cross-validation process. Finally, an external test set of over 600 new compounds was used to validate the resulting model predictivity.

resultsSeveral bioassay clusters showed high predictivity for acute oral toxicity (positive prediction rates range from 62-100%) through cross-validation. After incorporating individual clusters into an ensemble model, chemical toxicants in the external test set were evaluated for putative acute toxicity (positive prediction rate equal to 76%). Additionally, chemical fragment -in vitro-in vivo relationships were identified to illustrate new animal toxicity mechanisms.

conclusionsThe in vitro bioassay data-driven profiling strategy developed in this study meets the urgent needs of computational toxicology in the current big data era and can be extended to develop predictive models for other complex toxicity end points. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP3614.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimal Testing AlternativesComputational BiologyHazardous SubstancesHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysHumansRatsToxicity Tests, AcuteHazardous Substances

Identifiers

PMID30933541
PMCPMC6785238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.