Cargando…
Prioritizing Chemicals for Risk Assessment Using Chemoinformatics: Examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides
BACKGROUND: Identifying cancer hazards is the first step towards cancer prevention. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs Programme, which has evaluated nearly 1,000 agents for their carcinogenic potential since 1971, typically selects agents for hazard identification on...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5132635/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27164621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP186 |
_version_ | 1782471113187524608 |
---|---|
author | Guha, Neela Guyton, Kathryn Z. Loomis, Dana Barupal, Dinesh Kumar |
author_facet | Guha, Neela Guyton, Kathryn Z. Loomis, Dana Barupal, Dinesh Kumar |
author_sort | Guha, Neela |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Identifying cancer hazards is the first step towards cancer prevention. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs Programme, which has evaluated nearly 1,000 agents for their carcinogenic potential since 1971, typically selects agents for hazard identification on the basis of public nominations, expert advice, published data on carcinogenicity, and public health importance. OBJECTIVES: Here, we present a novel and complementary strategy for identifying agents for hazard evaluation using chemoinformatics, database integration, and automated text mining. DISCUSSION: To inform selection among a broad range of pesticides nominated for evaluation, we identified and screened nearly 6,000 relevant chemical structures, after which we systematically compiled information on 980 pesticides, creating network maps that allowed cluster visualization by chemical similarity, pesticide class, and publicly available information concerning cancer epidemiology, cancer bioassays, and carcinogenic mechanisms. For the IARC Monograph meetings that took place in March and June 2015, this approach supported high-priority evaluation of glyphosate, malathion, parathion, tetrachlorvinphos, diazinon, p,p′-dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), lindane, and 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic approach, accounting for chemical similarity and overlaying multiple data sources, can be used by risk assessors as well as by researchers to systematize, inform, and increase efficiency in selecting and prioritizing agents for hazard identification, risk assessment, regulation, or further investigation. This approach could be extended to an array of outcomes and agents, including occupational carcinogens, drugs, and foods. CITATION: Guha N, Guyton KZ, Loomis D, Barupal DK. 2016. Prioritizing chemicals for risk assessment using chemoinformatics: examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides. Environ Health Perspect 124:1823–1829; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP186 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5132635 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51326352016-12-12 Prioritizing Chemicals for Risk Assessment Using Chemoinformatics: Examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides Guha, Neela Guyton, Kathryn Z. Loomis, Dana Barupal, Dinesh Kumar Environ Health Perspect Research BACKGROUND: Identifying cancer hazards is the first step towards cancer prevention. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs Programme, which has evaluated nearly 1,000 agents for their carcinogenic potential since 1971, typically selects agents for hazard identification on the basis of public nominations, expert advice, published data on carcinogenicity, and public health importance. OBJECTIVES: Here, we present a novel and complementary strategy for identifying agents for hazard evaluation using chemoinformatics, database integration, and automated text mining. DISCUSSION: To inform selection among a broad range of pesticides nominated for evaluation, we identified and screened nearly 6,000 relevant chemical structures, after which we systematically compiled information on 980 pesticides, creating network maps that allowed cluster visualization by chemical similarity, pesticide class, and publicly available information concerning cancer epidemiology, cancer bioassays, and carcinogenic mechanisms. For the IARC Monograph meetings that took place in March and June 2015, this approach supported high-priority evaluation of glyphosate, malathion, parathion, tetrachlorvinphos, diazinon, p,p′-dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), lindane, and 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic approach, accounting for chemical similarity and overlaying multiple data sources, can be used by risk assessors as well as by researchers to systematize, inform, and increase efficiency in selecting and prioritizing agents for hazard identification, risk assessment, regulation, or further investigation. This approach could be extended to an array of outcomes and agents, including occupational carcinogens, drugs, and foods. CITATION: Guha N, Guyton KZ, Loomis D, Barupal DK. 2016. Prioritizing chemicals for risk assessment using chemoinformatics: examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides. Environ Health Perspect 124:1823–1829; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP186 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 2016-05-10 2016-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5132635/ /pubmed/27164621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP186 Text en http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Publication of EHP lies in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from EHP may be reprinted freely. Use of materials published in EHP should be acknowledged (for example, “Reproduced with permission from Environmental Health Perspectives”); pertinent reference information should be provided for the article from which the material was reproduced. Articles from EHP, especially the News section, may contain photographs or illustrations copyrighted by other commercial organizations or individuals that may not be used without obtaining prior approval from the holder of the copyright. |
spellingShingle | Research Guha, Neela Guyton, Kathryn Z. Loomis, Dana Barupal, Dinesh Kumar Prioritizing Chemicals for Risk Assessment Using Chemoinformatics: Examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides |
title | Prioritizing Chemicals for Risk Assessment Using Chemoinformatics: Examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides |
title_full | Prioritizing Chemicals for Risk Assessment Using Chemoinformatics: Examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides |
title_fullStr | Prioritizing Chemicals for Risk Assessment Using Chemoinformatics: Examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides |
title_full_unstemmed | Prioritizing Chemicals for Risk Assessment Using Chemoinformatics: Examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides |
title_short | Prioritizing Chemicals for Risk Assessment Using Chemoinformatics: Examples from the IARC Monographs on Pesticides |
title_sort | prioritizing chemicals for risk assessment using chemoinformatics: examples from the iarc monographs on pesticides |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5132635/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27164621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP186 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guhaneela prioritizingchemicalsforriskassessmentusingchemoinformaticsexamplesfromtheiarcmonographsonpesticides AT guytonkathrynz prioritizingchemicalsforriskassessmentusingchemoinformaticsexamplesfromtheiarcmonographsonpesticides AT loomisdana prioritizingchemicalsforriskassessmentusingchemoinformaticsexamplesfromtheiarcmonographsonpesticides AT barupaldineshkumar prioritizingchemicalsforriskassessmentusingchemoinformaticsexamplesfromtheiarcmonographsonpesticides |