Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34648052›Full record

ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2021

Predicting compound amenability with liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry to improve non-targeted analysis.

Charles N Lowe, Kristin K Isaacs, Andrew McEachran, Christopher M Grulke, Jon R Sobus, Elin M Ulrich, Ann Richard, Alex Chao, John Wambaugh, Antony J Williams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. CombinedJournal of chemical information and modeling · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Identifying xenobiotic metabolites withFrontiers in toxicology · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Exposure forecasting - ExpoCast - for data-poor chemicals in commerce and the environment.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2022
    Review
  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

10 authors.

Charles N LoweCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. lowe.charles@epa.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9151-6157
Kristin K IsaacsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9547-1654
Andrew McEachranAgilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1423-330X
Christopher M GrulkeCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5606-7560
Jon R SobusCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0740-6604
Elin M UlrichCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5143-9449
Ann RichardCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2116-2300
Alex ChaoCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7914-3623
John WambaughCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4024-534X
Antony J WilliamsCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2668-4821

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the increasing availability of high-resolution mass spectrometers, suspect screening and non-targeted analysis are becoming popular compound identification tools for environmental researchers. Samples of interest often contain a large (unknown) number of chemicals spanning the detectable mass range of the instrument. In an effort to separate these chemicals prior to injection into the mass spectrometer, a chromatography method is often utilized. There are numerous types of gas and liquid chromatographs that can be coupled to commercially available mass spectrometers. Depending on the type of instrument used for analysis, the researcher is likely to observe a different subset of compounds based on the amenability of those chemicals to the selected experimental techniques and equipment. It would be advantageous if this subset of chemicals could be predicted prior to conducting the experiment, in order to minimize potential false-positive and false-negative identifications. In this work, we utilize experimental datasets to predict the amenability of chemical compounds to detection with liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS). The assembled dataset totals 5517 unique chemicals either explicitly detected or not detected with LC-ESI-MS. The resulting detected/not-detected matrix has been modeled using specific molecular descriptors to predict which chemicals are amenable to LC-ESI-MS, and to which form(s) of ionization. Random forest models, including a measure of the applicability domain of the model for both positive and negative modes of the electrospray ionization source, were successfully developed. The outcome of this work will help to inform future suspect screening and non-targeted analyses of chemicals by better defining the potential LC-ESI-MS detectable chemical landscape of interest.

Indexed as

Machine learningMass spectrometryNon-targeted analysisPredictive modelingRandom forestSuspect screening analysis

Identifiers

PMID34648052
PMCPMC9589520

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.