ArticleComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2021
Repeat-dose toxicity prediction with Generalized Read-Across (GenRA) using targeted transcriptomic data: A proof-of-concept case study.
Article in Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Guidance on the use of read-across for chemical safety assessment in food and feed.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2025Article
- Can graph similarity metrics be helpful for analogue identification as part of a read-across approach?Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Mechanistic read-across comes of age: a comparative appraisal of EFSA 2025 guidance, ECHA's RAAF, and good read-across practice.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Review
- Article
- The physiological effects of acute and sub-lethal exposure to phenol on antioxidant enzyme activity in the freshwater sludge worm Tubifex tubifex.Toxicology reports · 2024Article
- Molecular similarity in chemical informatics and predictive toxicity modeling: from quantitative read-across (q-RA) to quantitative read-across structure-activity relationship (q-RASAR) with the application of machine learning.Critical reviews in toxicology · 2024Review
- A Comparison of Machine Learning Approaches for predicting Hepatotoxicity potential using Chemical Structure and Targeted Transcriptomic Data.Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- Grouping strategies for assessing and managing persistent and mobile substances.Environmental sciences Europe · 2024Review
- New approach methodologies in human regulatory toxicology - Not if, but how and when!Environment international · 2023Review
- Towards systematic read-across using Generalised Read-Across (GenRA).Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Article
- Wildfire Variable Toxicity: Identifying Biomass Smoke Exposure Groupings through Transcriptomic Similarity Scoring.Environmental science & technology · 2022Article
- Navigating Transcriptomic Connectivity Mapping Workflows to Link Chemicals with Bioactivities.Chemical research in toxicology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Read-across is a data gap filling technique utilized to predict the toxicity of a target chemical using data from similar analogues. Recent efforts such as Generalized Read-Across (GenRA) facilitate automated read-across predictions for untested chemicals. GenRA makes predictions of toxicity outcomes based on "neighboring" chemicals characterized by chemical and bioactivity fingerprints. Here we investigated the impact of biological similarities on neighborhood formation and read-across performance in predicting hazard (based on repeat-dose testing outcomes from US EPA ToxRefDB v2.0). We used targeted transcriptomic data on 93 genes for 1060 chemicals in HepaRG
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.