The DOI matches its Crossref record; 95 of the 95 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantitative structure-activity relationship methods: Perspectives on drug discovery and toxicology
Abstract
Quantitative structure—activity relationships (QSARs) attempt to correlate chemical structure with activity using statistical approaches. The QSAR models are useful for various purposes including the prediction of activities of untested chemicals. Quantitative structure—activity relationships and other related approaches have attracted broad scientific interest, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry for drug discovery and in toxicology and environmental science for risk assessment. An assortment of new QSAR methods have been developed during the past decade, most of them focused on drug discovery. Besides advancing our fundamental knowledge of QSARs, these scientific efforts have stimulated their application in a wider range of disciplines, such as toxicology, where QSARs have not yet gained full appreciation. In this review, we attempt to summarize the status of QSAR with emphasis on illuminating the utility and limitations of QSAR technology. We will first review two-dimensional (2D) QSAR with a discussion of the availability and appropriate selection of molecular descriptors. We will then proceed to describe three-dimensional (3D) QSAR and key issues associated with this technology, then compare the relative suitability of 2D and 3D QSAR for different applications. Given the recent technological advances in biological research for rapid identification of drug targets, we mention several examples in which QSAR approaches are employed in conjunction with improved knowledge of the structure and function of the target receptor. The review will conclude by discussing statistical validation of QSAR models, a topic that has received sparse attention in recent years despite its critical importance.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Lipinski, C. A., Lombardo, F., Dominy, B. W., & Feeney, P. J. (2001) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0169-409x(00)00129-0 · Cited by 18,139
Lipinski, C. A., Lombardo, F., Dominy, B. W., & Feeney, P. J. (1997) · Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0169-409x(96)00423-1 · Cited by 11,385
A survey of Hammett substituent constants and resonance and field parameters
Hansch, C., Leo, A., & Taft, R. W. (1991) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr00002a004 · Cited by 8,651
Partition coefficients and their uses
Leo, A., Hansch, C., & Elkins, D. (1971) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr60274a001 · Cited by 4,540
Cramer, R. D., Patterson, D. E., & Bunce, J. D. (1988) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja00226a005 · Cited by 3,931
Goodford, P. J. (1985) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jm00145a002 · Cited by 2,634
Free energy calculations: Applications to chemical and biochemical phenomena
Kollman, P. (1993) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr00023a004 · Cited by 2,101
(1956) · Journal of the Franklin Institute · doi:10.1016/0016-0032(56)91284-4 · Cited by 1,949
Linear Model Selection by Cross-validation
Shao, J. (1993) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1993.10476299 · Cited by 1,790
A gene expression database for the molecular pharmacology of cancer
Scherf, U., Ross, D. T., Waltham, M., Smith, L. H., Lee, J. K., Tanabe, L., Kohn, K. W., Reinhold, W. C., Myers, T. G., Andrews, D. T., et al. (2000) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/73439 · Cited by 1,450
Cited by
Biochemical biomarkers in algae and marine pollution: A review
Torres, M. A., Barros, M. P., Campos, S. C. G., Pinto, E., Rajamani, S., Sayre, R. T., & Colepicolo, P. (2008) · Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2008.05.009 · Cited by 567
Gonzales, G. B., Smagghe, G., Grootaert, C., Zotti, M., Raes, K., & Camp, J. V. (2015) · Drug Metabolism Reviews · doi:10.3109/03602532.2014.1003649 · Cited by 254
eToxPred: a machine learning-based approach to estimate the toxicity of drug candidates
Pu, L., Naderi, M., Liu, T., Wu, H.-C., Mukhopadhyay, S., & Brylinski, M. (2019) · BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology · doi:10.1186/s40360-018-0282-6 · Cited by 212
“VS employing features provided by pharmacophore modeling [6] and quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) analysis [7] can be performed in order to identify potentially active compounds.”
MethodMyint, K.-Z., Wang, L., Tong, Q., & Xie, X.-Q. (2012) · Molecular Pharmaceutics · doi:10.1021/mp300237z · Cited by 139
QSAR Models for the Analysis of Bioresponse Data from Combinatorial Libraries of Biomaterials
Smith, J. R., Kholodovych, V., Knight, D., Welsh, W. J., & Kohn, J. (2005) · QSAR & Combinatorial Science · doi:10.1002/qsar.200420062 · Cited by 39
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Perkins, R., Fang, H., Tong, W., & Welsh, W. J.
- Venue
- Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-08-01
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1666-1679
- ISSN
- 0730-7268 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8618
- OpenAlex
- W2149775989
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 95
- FWCI
- 8.38
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantitative structure-activity relationship methods: Perspectives on drug discovery and toxicology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1897/01-171
- The paper
- Perkins, R., Fang, H., Tong, W., & Welsh, W. J. (2003). Quantitative structure-activity relationship methods: Perspectives on drug discovery and toxicology. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1897/01-171
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.