...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of chemical information and modeling >Assessment of methods to define the applicability domain of structural alert models
【24h】

Assessment of methods to define the applicability domain of structural alert models

机译:评估定义结构警报模型适用范围的方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

It is important that in silico models for use in chemical safety legislation, such as REACH, are compliant with the OECD Principles for the Validation of (Q)SARs. Structural alert models can be useful under these circumstances but lack an adequately defined applicability domain. This paper examines several methods of domain definition for structural alert models with the aim of assessing which were the most useful. Specifically, these methods were the use of fragments, chemical descriptor ranges, structural similarity, and specific applicability domain definition software. Structural alerts for mutagenicity in Derek for Windows (DfW) were used as examples, and Ames test data were used to define and test the domain of chemical space where the alerts produce reliable results. The usefulness of each domain was assessed on the criterion that confidence in the correctness of predictions should be greater inside the domain than outside it. By using a combination of structural similarity and chemical fragments a domain was produced where the majority of correct positive predictions for mutagenicity were within the domain and a large proportion of the incorrect positive predictions outside it. However this was not found for the negative predictions; there was little difference between the percentage of true and false predictions for inactivity which were found as either within or outside the applicability domain. A hypothesis for the occurrence of this difference between positive and negative predictions is that differences in structure between training and test compounds are more likely to remove the toxic potential of a compound containing a structural alert than to add an unknown mechanism of action (structural alert) to a molecule which does not already contain an alert. This could be especially true for well studied end points such as the Ames assay where the majority of mechanisms of action are likely to be known. (Figure presented).
机译:重要的是,用于化学安全法规的计算机模型(例如REACH)必须符合OECD(Q)SAR验证原则。在这些情况下,结构警报模型可能很有用,但缺少适当定义的适用范围。本文研究了结构警报模型的几种域定义方法,旨在评估哪种方法最有用。具体来说,这些方法是使用片段,化学描述符范围,结构相似性和特定的适用性域定义软件。以Windows Derek(DfW)中的致突变性结构警报为例,使用Ames测试数据定义和测试警报可产生可靠结果的化学空间域。根据以下准则评估每个领域的有用性:对领域内预测的正确性应大于对领域外的预测。通过使用结构相似性和化学片段的组合,产生了一个域,其中诱变性的大多数正确阳性预测都在该域内,而很大一部分不正确阳性预测在其外。但是,对于负面预测未发现这一点。在适用范围之内或之外,对于非活动的正确和错误预测的百分比之间几乎没有差异。阳性预测和阴性预测之间存在这种差异的假设是,训练化合物和测试化合物之间的结构差异更可能消除含有结构警报的化合物的潜在毒性,而不是添加未知的作用机制(结构警报)尚未包含警报的分子。对于经过充分研究的终点(例如Ames分析),尤其是其中大多数的作用机制可能是已知的,尤其如此。 (图中显示)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号