Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41816363›Full record

ArticleComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2025

Building a compendium of expert driven read-across cases to facilitate an analysis of the contribution that different similarity contexts play in read-across performance.

Grace Patlewicz, Nathaniel Charest, Amanda Ross, H C Bledsoe, Janielle Vidal, Sadegh Faramarzi, Brett Hagan, Imran Shah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 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

8 authors.

Grace PatlewiczCenter for Computational Toxicology & Exposure (CCTE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC 27709, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3863-9689
Nathaniel CharestCenter for Computational Toxicology & Exposure (CCTE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC 27709, USA.
Amanda RossICF Corporation, Reston, VA, USA.
H C BledsoeICF Corporation, Reston, VA, USA.
Janielle VidalICF Corporation, Reston, VA, USA.
Sadegh FaramarziICF Corporation, Reston, VA, USA.
Brett HaganOak Ridge Associated University, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, USA.
Imran ShahCenter for Computational Toxicology & Exposure (CCTE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC 27709, USA.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Read-across is a data-gap filling technique used to predict the toxicity of a target chemical based on data from similar analogues. It is predominantly performed through expert-driven assessments which can limit reproducibility and broader acceptance. Data-driven approaches such as Generalised Read-Across (GenRA) offer the potential to generate more reproducible read-across predictions with quantified uncertainties and performance metrics. A key challenge is reconciling expert- and data-driven approaches particularly in how analogues are identified, evaluated and used to derive predictions. A critical aspect of analogue selection lies in understanding the relative contribution of different similarity contexts e.g. whether structural similarity plays a larger role than metabolism similarity. This study explored these considerations by compiling a compendium of expert-driven read-across assessments for repeated dose toxicity endpoints from peer reviewed and grey literature. Pairwise similarity was quantified across structural, physicochemical, metabolic and reactivity features within each case and a prediction model was developed to evaluate the contribution of each similarity context in analogue selection. Although the dataset comprised 157 read-across cases and 695 unique substances, it was limited in size, heterogeneous in origin and variable in analogue selection criteria and use contexts. These factors constrain generalisability of the findings and indicate that conclusions should be interpreted with caution. Nonetheless, the qualitative insight that structure and metabolism were influential led to a followup investigation using graph-based deep learning to explore whether embeddings derived from structure and/or metabolism information could improve read-across predictions, using repeated dose toxicity as a case study, relative to structural similarity baselines.

Indexed as

Read-acrossRead-across performanceRegulatory purposesSimilarity context

Identifiers

PMID41816363
PMCPMC12973262

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.