Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40981347›Full record

ArticleJournal of xenobiotics2025

Evaluation of Endocrine Disruptome and VirtualToxLab for Predicting Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Binding to Nuclear Receptors.

Nina Franko, Manca Vetrih, Marija Sollner Dolenc

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of xenobiotics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Nina FrankoDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Ljubljana, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0002-4593-6887
Manca VetrihDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Ljubljana, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Marija Sollner DolencDepartment of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Ljubljana, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0002-0560-3762

Funding

The Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency program code P1-0208
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated whether the Endocrine Disruptome and VirtualToxLab in silico platforms are suitable for predicting the endocrine disrupting effects of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs)-in particular, for interactions with oestrogen receptors (ERs) and androgen receptor (AR). Compounds included in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's PFAS working list were analysed with both models, and the results were compared with the available in vitro data regarding their modulation of nuclear receptors. Based on the identified prediction parameters, such as sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and Mathews' correlation coefficient, VirtualToxLab was found to be a reliable model for predicting the reactivity of PFASs with AR, while a positive consensus approach of both platforms provided reliable predictions of the PFAS reactivity with ERα and ERβ. This study provides the evidence that Endocrine Disruptome and VirtualToxLab can be used as a tier 1 screening tool for assessment of the endocrine disrupting effect of PFASs. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the likelihood of endocrine disrupting properties increases with the lipophilicity of PFASs and identifies the understudied PFHpS, PFNS, PFDS, 9-Cl, NMeFOSAA, NEtFOSAA, 4:2 FTS, 6:2 FTS, 8:2 FTS, 6:2 monoPAP, 8:2 monoPAP, and 5:3 acid as potential ligands of AR and/or ERs.

Indexed as

androgen receptorendocrine disruptionEndocrine Disruptomeglucocorticoid receptorin siliconew approach methodsoestrogen receptorPFASVirtualToxLab

Identifiers

PMID40981347
PMCPMC12452740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.