Cargando…

The Good, The Bad, and The Perplexing: Structural Alerts and Read-Across for Predicting Skin Sensitization Using Human Data

[Image: see text] In our earlier work (Golden et al., 2021), we showed 70–80% accuracies for several skin sensitization computational tools using human data. Here, we expanded the data set using the NICEATM human skin sensitization database to create a final data set of 1355 discrete chemicals (larg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Golden, Emily, Ukaegbu, Daniel C., Ranslow, Peter, Brown, Robert H., Hartung, Thomas, Maertens, Alexandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Chemical Society 2023
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10189792/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37126467
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.2c00383
_version_ 1785043160234196992
author Golden, Emily
Ukaegbu, Daniel C.
Ranslow, Peter
Brown, Robert H.
Hartung, Thomas
Maertens, Alexandra
author_facet Golden, Emily
Ukaegbu, Daniel C.
Ranslow, Peter
Brown, Robert H.
Hartung, Thomas
Maertens, Alexandra
author_sort Golden, Emily
collection PubMed
description [Image: see text] In our earlier work (Golden et al., 2021), we showed 70–80% accuracies for several skin sensitization computational tools using human data. Here, we expanded the data set using the NICEATM human skin sensitization database to create a final data set of 1355 discrete chemicals (largely negative, ∼70%). Using this expanded data set, we analyzed model performance and evaluated mispredictions using Toxtree (v 3.1.0), OECD QSAR Toolbox (v 4.5), VEGA’s (1.2.0 BETA) CAESAR (v 2.1.7), and a k-nearest-neighbor (kNN) classification approach. We show that the accuracy on this data set was lower than previous estimates, with balanced accuracies being 63% and 65% for Toxtree and OECD QSAR Toolbox, respectively, 46% for VEGA, and 59% for a kNN approach, with the lower accuracy likely due to the higher percentage of nonsensitizing chemicals. Two hundred eighty seven chemicals were mispredicted by both Toxtree and OECD QSAR Toolbox, which was approximately 20% of the entire data set, and 84% of these were false positives. The absence or presence of metabolic simulation in OECD QSAR Toolbox made no overall difference. While Toxtree is known for overpredicting, 60% of the chemicals in the data set had no alert for skin sensitization, and a substantial number of these chemicals were in fact sensitizers, pointing to sensitization mechanisms not recognized by Toxtree. Interestingly, we observed that chemicals with more than one Toxtree alert were more likely to be nonsensitizers. Finally, a kNN approach tended to mispredict different chemicals than either OECD QSAR Toolbox or Toxtree, suggesting that there was additional information to be garnered from a kNN approach. Overall, the results demonstrate that while there is merit in structural alerts as well as QSAR or read-across approaches (perhaps even more so in their combination), additional improvement will require a more nuanced understanding of mechanisms of skin sensitization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10189792
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher American Chemical Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101897922023-05-18 The Good, The Bad, and The Perplexing: Structural Alerts and Read-Across for Predicting Skin Sensitization Using Human Data Golden, Emily Ukaegbu, Daniel C. Ranslow, Peter Brown, Robert H. Hartung, Thomas Maertens, Alexandra Chem Res Toxicol [Image: see text] In our earlier work (Golden et al., 2021), we showed 70–80% accuracies for several skin sensitization computational tools using human data. Here, we expanded the data set using the NICEATM human skin sensitization database to create a final data set of 1355 discrete chemicals (largely negative, ∼70%). Using this expanded data set, we analyzed model performance and evaluated mispredictions using Toxtree (v 3.1.0), OECD QSAR Toolbox (v 4.5), VEGA’s (1.2.0 BETA) CAESAR (v 2.1.7), and a k-nearest-neighbor (kNN) classification approach. We show that the accuracy on this data set was lower than previous estimates, with balanced accuracies being 63% and 65% for Toxtree and OECD QSAR Toolbox, respectively, 46% for VEGA, and 59% for a kNN approach, with the lower accuracy likely due to the higher percentage of nonsensitizing chemicals. Two hundred eighty seven chemicals were mispredicted by both Toxtree and OECD QSAR Toolbox, which was approximately 20% of the entire data set, and 84% of these were false positives. The absence or presence of metabolic simulation in OECD QSAR Toolbox made no overall difference. While Toxtree is known for overpredicting, 60% of the chemicals in the data set had no alert for skin sensitization, and a substantial number of these chemicals were in fact sensitizers, pointing to sensitization mechanisms not recognized by Toxtree. Interestingly, we observed that chemicals with more than one Toxtree alert were more likely to be nonsensitizers. Finally, a kNN approach tended to mispredict different chemicals than either OECD QSAR Toolbox or Toxtree, suggesting that there was additional information to be garnered from a kNN approach. Overall, the results demonstrate that while there is merit in structural alerts as well as QSAR or read-across approaches (perhaps even more so in their combination), additional improvement will require a more nuanced understanding of mechanisms of skin sensitization. American Chemical Society 2023-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10189792/ /pubmed/37126467 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.2c00383 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Permits non-commercial access and re-use, provided that author attribution and integrity are maintained; but does not permit creation of adaptations or other derivative works (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Golden, Emily
Ukaegbu, Daniel C.
Ranslow, Peter
Brown, Robert H.
Hartung, Thomas
Maertens, Alexandra
The Good, The Bad, and The Perplexing: Structural Alerts and Read-Across for Predicting Skin Sensitization Using Human Data
title The Good, The Bad, and The Perplexing: Structural Alerts and Read-Across for Predicting Skin Sensitization Using Human Data
title_full The Good, The Bad, and The Perplexing: Structural Alerts and Read-Across for Predicting Skin Sensitization Using Human Data
title_fullStr The Good, The Bad, and The Perplexing: Structural Alerts and Read-Across for Predicting Skin Sensitization Using Human Data
title_full_unstemmed The Good, The Bad, and The Perplexing: Structural Alerts and Read-Across for Predicting Skin Sensitization Using Human Data
title_short The Good, The Bad, and The Perplexing: Structural Alerts and Read-Across for Predicting Skin Sensitization Using Human Data
title_sort good, the bad, and the perplexing: structural alerts and read-across for predicting skin sensitization using human data
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10189792/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37126467
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.2c00383
work_keys_str_mv AT goldenemily thegoodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT ukaegbudanielc thegoodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT ranslowpeter thegoodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT brownroberth thegoodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT hartungthomas thegoodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT maertensalexandra thegoodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT goldenemily goodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT ukaegbudanielc goodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT ranslowpeter goodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT brownroberth goodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT hartungthomas goodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata
AT maertensalexandra goodthebadandtheperplexingstructuralalertsandreadacrossforpredictingskinsensitizationusinghumandata