ArticleToxics2024
A Novel Machine Learning Model and a Web Portal for Predicting the Human Skin Sensitization Effects of Chemical Agents.
Article in Toxics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Multiview Information for Enhanced Deep Learning-Based Acute Dermal Toxicity Prediction.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- AlternativeExpert reviews in molecular medicine · 2026Review
- Optimizing skin sensitization prediction across activity cliffs: a comparative analysis of K-nearest neighbours vs random Forest.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Article
- Article
- SbD4Skin by EosCloud: Integrating multi-view molecular representation for predicting skin sensitization, irritation, and acute dermal toxicity.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Skin sensitization is a significant concern for chemical safety assessments. Traditional animal assays often fail to predict human responses accurately, and ethical constraints limit the collection of human data, necessitating a need for reliable in silico models of skin sensitization prediction. This study introduces HuSSPred, an in silico tool based on the Human Predictive Patch Test (HPPT). HuSSPred aims to enhance the reliability of predicting human skin sensitization effects for chemical agents to support their regulatory assessment. We have curated an extensive HPPT database and performed chemical space analysis and grouping. Binary and multiclass QSAR models were developed with Bayesian hyperparameter optimization. Model performance was evaluated via five-fold cross-validation. We performed model validation with reference data from the Defined Approaches for Skin Sensitization (DASS) app. HuSSPred models demonstrated strong predictive performance with CCR ranging from 55 to 88%, sensitivity between 48 and 89%, and specificity between 37 and 92%. The positive predictive value (PPV) ranged from 84 to 97%, versus negative predictive value (NPV) from 22 to 65%, and coverage was between 75 and 93%. Our models exhibited comparable or improved performance compared to existing tools, and the external validation showed the high accuracy and sensitivity of the developed models. HuSSPred provides a reliable, open-access, and ethical alternative to traditional testing for skin sensitization. Its high accuracy and reasonable coverage make it a valuable resource for regulatory assessments, aligning with the 3Rs principles. The publicly accessible HuSSPred web tool offers a user-friendly interface for predicting skin sensitization based on chemical structure.
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.