Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 171

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Developing Structure−Activity Relationships for the Prediction of Hepatotoxicity

Greene, Nigel, Fisk, Lilia, Naven, Russell T., Note, Reine R., Patel, Mukesh L., Pelletier, Dennis J.·2010·Chemical Research in Toxicology

Abstract

Drug-induced liver injury is a major issue of concern and has led to the withdrawal of a significant number of marketed drugs. An understanding of structure-activity relationships (SARs) of chemicals can make a significant contribution to the identification of potential toxic effects early in the drug development process and aid in avoiding such problems. This process can be supported by the use of existing toxicity data and mechanistic understanding of the biological processes for related compounds. In the published literature, this information is often spread across diverse sources and can be varied and unstructured in quality and content. The current work has explored whether it is feasible to collect and use such data for the development of new SARs for the hepatotoxicity endpoint and expand upon the limited information currently available in this area. Reviews of hepatotoxicity data were used to build a structure-searchable database, which was analyzed to identify chemical classes associated with an adverse effect on the liver. Searches of the published literature were then undertaken to identify additional supporting evidence, and the resulting information was incorporated into the database. This collated information was evaluated and used to determine the scope of the SARs for each class identified. Data for over 1266 chemicals were collected, and SARs for 38 classes were developed. The SARs have been implemented as structural alerts using Derek for Windows (DfW), a knowledge-based expert system, to allow clearly supported and transparent predictions. An evaluation exercise performed using a customized DfW version 10 knowledge base demonstrated an overall concordance of 56% and specificity and sensitivity values of 73% and 46%, respectively. The approach taken demonstrates that SARs for complex endpoints can be derived from the published data for use in the in silico toxicity assessment of new compounds.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/tx1000865

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 171

Metadata

Authors
Greene, N., Fisk, L., Naven, R. T., Note, R. R., Patel, M. L., & Pelletier, D. J.
Venue
Chemical Research in Toxicology
Published
2010-06-16
Volume
23
Issue
7
Pages
1215-1222
ISSN
  • 0893-228X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5010
OpenAlex
W2065961278
Cited by
171
References
4
FWCI
5.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.