Toxicity Data Informatics: Supporting a New Paradigm for Toxicity Prediction

ABSTRACT Chemical toxicity data at all levels of description, from treatment-level dose response data to a high-level summarized toxicity “endpoint,” effectively circumscribe, enable, and limit predictive toxicology approaches and capabilities. Several new and evolving public data initiatives focused on the world of chemical toxicity information—as represented here by ToxML (Toxicology XML standard), DSSTox (Distributed Structure-Searchable Toxicity Database Network), and ACToR (Aggregated Computational Toxicology Resource)—are contributing to the creation of a more unified, mineable, and modelable landscape of public toxicity data. These projects address different layers in the spectrum of toxicological data representation and detail and, additionally, span diverse domains of toxicology and chemistry in relation to industry and environmental regulatory concerns. For each of the three projects, data standards are the key to enabling “read-across” in relation to toxicity data and chemical-indexed information. In turn, “read-across” capability enables flexible data mining, as well as meaningful aggregation of lower levels of toxicity information to summarized, modelable endpoints spanning sufficient areas of chemical space for building predictive models. By means of shared data standards and transparent and flexible rules for data aggregation, these and related public data initiatives are effectively spanning the divides among experimental toxicologists, computational modelers, and the world of chemically indexed, publicly available toxicity information.

[1]  Ann M Richard,et al.  Distributed structure-searchable toxicity (DSSTox) public database network: a proposal. , 2002, Mutation research.

[2]  R Daniel Benz,et al.  Landscape of current toxicity databases and database standards. , 2006, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[3]  J. Ashby,et al.  The influence of chemical structure on the extent and sites of carcinogenesis for 522 rodent carcinogens and 55 different human carcinogen exposures. , 1993, Mutation research.

[4]  Ann M. Richard,et al.  Public Sources of Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity Data: Use in Structure–Activity Relationship Models , 2003 .

[5]  Enhanced mutagenesis of Salmonella tester strains due to deletion of genes other than uvrB , 2007, Environmental and molecular mutagenesis.

[6]  J. S. Wassom,et al.  Current status of the Gene-Tox Program. , 1991, Environmental health perspectives.

[7]  Ann M Richard,et al.  Challenges in constructing statistically based structure-activity relationship models for developmental toxicity. , 2004, Birth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology.

[8]  W. Raub From the National Institutes of Health. , 1990, JAMA.

[9]  L. Gold,et al.  Supplement to the Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB): results of animal bioassays published in the general literature in 1993 to 1994 and by the National Toxicology Program in 1995 to 1996. , 1999, Environmental health perspectives.

[10]  T. Knudsen,et al.  Computational systems analysis of developmental toxicity: design, development and implementation of a Birth Defects Systems Manager (BDSM). , 2005, Reproductive toxicology.

[11]  B. Ames The Detection of Chemical Mutagens with Enteric Bacteria , 1971 .

[12]  R Benigni The first US National Toxicology Program exercise on the prediction of rodent carcinogenicity: definitive results. , 1997, Mutation research.

[13]  Ann Richard,et al.  ACToR--Aggregated Computational Toxicology Resource. , 2008, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[14]  R Benigni,et al.  Understanding Genetic Toxicity Through Data Mining: The Process of Building Knowledge by Integrating Multiple Genetic Toxicity Databases , 2008, Toxicology mechanisms and methods.

[15]  D. Dix,et al.  The ToxCast program for prioritizing toxicity testing of environmental chemicals. , 2007, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[16]  F. Serres,et al.  CHEMICAL MUTAGENS: PRINCIPLES AND METHODS FOR THEIR DETECTION , 1972 .

[17]  K Enslein,et al.  Assessment of developmental toxicity potential of chemicals by quantitative structure-toxicity relationship models. , 1995, Chemosphere.

[18]  Ann M Richard,et al.  A novel approach: chemical relational databases, and the role of the ISSCAN database on assessing chemical carcinogenicity. , 2008, Annali dell'Istituto superiore di sanita.

[19]  Ann M Richard,et al.  Chemical structure indexing of toxicity data on the internet: moving toward a flat world. , 2006, Current opinion in drug discovery & development.

[20]  Chihae Yang,et al.  The Art of Data Mining the Minefields of Toxicity Databases to Link Chemistry to Biology , 2006 .

[21]  R. Tennant,et al.  Stratification of rodent carcinogenicity bioassay results to reflect relative human hazard. , 1993, Mutation research.

[22]  Ann M Richard,et al.  Future of toxicology--predictive toxicology: An expanded view of "chemical toxicity". , 2006, Chemical research in toxicology.

[23]  Emilio Benfenati,et al.  The Expanding Role of Predictive Toxicology: An Update on the (Q)SAR Models for Mutagens and Carcinogens , 2007, Journal of environmental science and health. Part C, Environmental carcinogenesis & ecotoxicology reviews.

[24]  J. Kazius,et al.  Derivation and validation of toxicophores for mutagenicity prediction. , 2005, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[25]  N. Kruhlak,et al.  In silico screening of chemicals for bacterial mutagenicity using electrotopological E-state indices and MDL QSAR software. , 2005, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[26]  Phosalone Tred US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Phosalone , 2006 .

[27]  T. Insel,et al.  NIH Molecular Libraries Initiative , 2004, Science.

[28]  E. Zeiger,et al.  Handbook of Carcinogenic Potency and Genotoxicity Databases , 1996 .