RESUMEN

Predictive and computational toxicology, a highly scientific and research-based field, is rapidly progressing with wider acceptance by regulatory agencies around the world. Almost every aspect of the field has seen fundamental changes during the last decade due to the availability of more data, usage, and acceptance of a variety of predictive tools and an increase in the overall awareness. Also, the influence from the recent explosive developments in the field of artificial intelligence has been significant. However, the need for sophisticated, easy to use and well-maintained software platforms for in silico toxicological assessments remains very high. The MultiCASE suite of software is one such platform that consists of an integrated collection of software programs, tools, and databases. While providing easy-to-use and highly useful tools that are relevant at present, it has always remained at the forefront of research and development by inventing new technologies and discovering new insights in the area of QSAR, artificial intelligence, and machine learning. This chapter gives the background, an overview of the software and databases involved, and a brief description of the usage methodology with the aid of examples.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Ames test is used worldwide for detecting the bacterial mutagenicity of chemicals. In silico analyses of bacterial mutagenicity have recently gained acceptance by regulatory agencies; however, current in silico models for prediction remain to be improved. The Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (JPMA) organized a task force in 2017 in which eight Japanese pharmaceutical companies had participated. The purpose of this task force was to disclose a piece of pharmaceutical companies' proprietary Ames test data. RESULTS: Ames test data for 99 chemicals of various chemical classes were collected for disclosure in this study. These chemicals are related to the manufacturing process of pharmaceutical drugs, including reagents, synthetic intermediates, and drug substances. The structure-activity (mutagenicity) relationships are discussed in relation to structural alerts for each chemical class. In addition, in silico analyses of these chemicals were conducted using a knowledge-based model of Derek Nexus (Derek) and a statistics-based model (GT1_BMUT module) of CASE Ultra. To calculate the effectiveness of these models, 89 chemicals for Derek and 54 chemicals for CASE Ultra were selected; major exclusions were the salt form of four chemicals that were tested both in the salt and free forms for both models, and 35 chemicals called "known" positives or negatives for CASE Ultra. For Derek, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 65% (15/23), 71% (47/66), and 70% (62/89), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 50% (6/12), 60% (25/42), and 57% (31/54) for CASE Ultra, respectively. The ratio of overall disagreement between the CASE Ultra "known" positives/negatives and the actual test results was 11% (4/35). In this study, 19 out of 28 mutagens (68%) were detected with TA100 and/or TA98, and 9 out of 28 mutagens (32%) were detected with either TA1535, TA1537, WP2uvrA, or their combination. CONCLUSION: The Ames test data presented here will help avoid duplicated Ames testing in some cases, support duplicate testing in other cases, improve in silico models, and enhance our understanding of the mechanisms of mutagenesis.

RESUMEN

4-Methylimidazole (4-MeI) is a nitrogen-containing heterocyclic compound that is used in the manufacture of chemicals, dyes and pharmaceuticals and may be found in a variety of foods following formation during heating. The purpose of this study was to use two different in silico programs, CASE Ultra and Toxtree, to investigate potential structure-activity relationships in 4-MeI and its metabolites for mutagenicity and carcinogenicity, and combine that information with the available literature to draw conclusions regarding the strength of the predictions observed. Neither CASE Ultra nor Toxtree identified any structural alerts that were associated with mutagenic activity. Data for 4-MeI from a single study were used in the development of the CASE Ultra mouse and rat carcinogenicity models, but no additional similar structures were identified in the carcinogenicity model training set. One metabolite, 5-methylhydantoin, was predicted to be positive in the CASE Ultra carcinogenicity male and female mouse models; positive predictivity percentages of 60.9% and 73.7%, respectively. However, low structural similarity between 5-methylhydantoin and the compounds identified in the training set (<25%) decreases confidence in the positive prediction. Three metabolites were predicted to be positive in the CASE Ultra mouse micronucleus model, but again suffered from low structural similarity. Both limited structural similarity and inconsistent responses among the other clastogenicity models suggest that additional structurally similar compounds are needed to assess the predictive capacity of these alerts for biological activity of these compounds.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

National legislations for the assessment of the skin sensitization potential of chemicals are increasingly based on the globally harmonized system (GHS). In this study, experimental data on 55 non-sensitizing and 45 sensitizing chemicals were evaluated according to GHS criteria and used to test the performance of computer (in silico) models for the prediction of skin sensitization. Statistic models (Vega, Case Ultra, TOPKAT), mechanistic models (Toxtree, OECD (Q)SAR toolbox, DEREK) or a hybrid model (TIMES-SS) were evaluated. Between three and nine of the substances evaluated were found in the individual training sets of various models. Mechanism based models performed better than statistical models and gave better predictivities depending on the stringency of the domain definition. Best performance was achieved by TIMES-SS, with a perfect prediction, whereby only 16% of the substances were within its reliability domain. Some models offer modules for potency; however predictions did not correlate well with the GHS sensitization subcategory derived from the experimental data. In conclusion, although mechanistic models can be used to a certain degree under well-defined conditions, at the present, the in silico models are not sufficiently accurate for broad application to predict skin sensitization potentials.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Purpose of this pilot study is to test the QSAR expert system CASE Ultra for adverse effect prediction of drugs. 870 drugs from the SIDER adverse effect dataset were tested using CASE Ultra for carcinogenicity, genetic, liver, cardiac, renal and reproductive toxicity. 47 drugs that were withdrawn from market since the 1950s were also evaluated for potential risks using CASE Ultra and compared them with the actual reasons for which the drugs were recalled. For the whole SIDER test set (n=870), sensitivity and specificity of the carcinogenicity predictions are 66.67 % and 82.17 % respectively; for liver toxicity: 78.95 %, 78.50 %; cardiotoxicity: 69.07 %, 57.57 %; renal toxicity: 46.88 %, 67.90 %; and reproductive toxicity: 100.00 %, 61.10 %. For the SIDER test chemicals not present in the training sets of the models, sensitivity and specificity of carcinogenicity predictions are 100.00 % and 88.89 % respectively (n=404); for liver toxicity: 100.00 %, 51.33 % (n=115); cardiotoxicity: 100.00 %, 20.45 % (n=94); renal toxicity: 100.00 %, 45.54 % (n=115); and reproductive toxicity: 100.00 %, 48.57 % (n=246). CASE Ultra correctly recognized the relevant toxic effects in 43 out of the 47 withdrawn drugs. It predicted all 9 drugs that were not part of the training set of the models, as unsafe.