ArticleJournal of xenobiotics2023
Underestimations in the In Silico-Predicted Toxicities of V-Agents.
Article in Journal of xenobiotics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-driven computational drug design: tools, workflow and challenges.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Computational Chemistry and Toxicology of Phosphonate Esters of Alkyl Acetoacetates, an Unexplored Class of V-Agents.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review on the Toxicology of European Union-Approved Triazole Fungicides in Cell Lines and Mammalian Models.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Review
- In Silico Forensic Toxicology: Is It Feasible?Toxics · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
V-agents are exceedingly toxic nerve agents. Recently, it was highlighted that V-agents constitute a diverse subclass of compounds with most of them not extensively studied. Although chemical weapons have been banned under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), there is an increased concern for chemical terrorism. Thus, it is important to understand their properties and toxicities, especially since some of these agents are not included in the CWC list. Nonetheless, to achieve this goal, the testing of a huge number of compounds is needed. Alternatively, in silico toxicology offers a great advantage for the rapid assessment of toxic compounds. Here, various in silico tools (TEST, VEGA, pkCSM ProTox-II) were used to estimate the acute oral toxicity (LD50) of different V-agents and compare them with experimental values. These programs underestimated the toxicity of V-agents, and certain V-agents were estimated to be relatively non-toxic. TEST was also used to estimate the physical properties and found to provide good approximations for densities, surface tensions and vapor pressures but not for viscosities. Thus, attention should be paid when interpreting and estimating the toxicities of V-agents in silico, and it is necessary to conduct future detailed experiments to understand their properties and develop effective countermeasures.
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.