Comparison and possible use of in Silico tools for carcinogenicity within REACH legislation

Chiara Milan, Onofrio Schifanella, Alessandra Roncaglioni, Emilio Benfenati

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Seven in silico models have been used to assess the prediction accuracy of chemical compound carcinogenicity. More than 1500 compounds with experimental values have been used to evaluate the models. Here we review the application of these models for toxicity prediction and their advantages and disadvantages, discussing the different approaches underlying the models and their main critical points. Some models have fewer false negatives while others are better at avoiding false positives. Since carcinogenicity is typically evaluated using a series of studies, identification of a strategy using one, or preferably a battery of in silico models, could reduce the number of animal studies needed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)300-323
Number of pages24
JournalJournal of Environmental Science and Health - Part C Environmental Carcinogenesis and Ecotoxicology Reviews
Volume29
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 1 2011

Fingerprint

Legislation
Computer Simulation

Keywords

  • alternative methods
  • carcinogenicity
  • QSAR
  • REACH

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

@article{6e0767def3c14d668c96416d68e29746,
title = "Comparison and possible use of in Silico tools for carcinogenicity within REACH legislation",
abstract = "Seven in silico models have been used to assess the prediction accuracy of chemical compound carcinogenicity. More than 1500 compounds with experimental values have been used to evaluate the models. Here we review the application of these models for toxicity prediction and their advantages and disadvantages, discussing the different approaches underlying the models and their main critical points. Some models have fewer false negatives while others are better at avoiding false positives. Since carcinogenicity is typically evaluated using a series of studies, identification of a strategy using one, or preferably a battery of in silico models, could reduce the number of animal studies needed.",
keywords = "alternative methods, carcinogenicity, QSAR, REACH",
author = "Chiara Milan and Onofrio Schifanella and Alessandra Roncaglioni and Emilio Benfenati",
year = "2011",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/10590501.2011.629973",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "300--323",
journal = "Environmental Carcinogenesis and Ecotoxicology Reviews",
issn = "1059-0501",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison and possible use of in Silico tools for carcinogenicity within REACH legislation

AU - Milan, Chiara

AU - Schifanella, Onofrio

AU - Roncaglioni, Alessandra

AU - Benfenati, Emilio

PY - 2011/10/1

Y1 - 2011/10/1

N2 - Seven in silico models have been used to assess the prediction accuracy of chemical compound carcinogenicity. More than 1500 compounds with experimental values have been used to evaluate the models. Here we review the application of these models for toxicity prediction and their advantages and disadvantages, discussing the different approaches underlying the models and their main critical points. Some models have fewer false negatives while others are better at avoiding false positives. Since carcinogenicity is typically evaluated using a series of studies, identification of a strategy using one, or preferably a battery of in silico models, could reduce the number of animal studies needed.

AB - Seven in silico models have been used to assess the prediction accuracy of chemical compound carcinogenicity. More than 1500 compounds with experimental values have been used to evaluate the models. Here we review the application of these models for toxicity prediction and their advantages and disadvantages, discussing the different approaches underlying the models and their main critical points. Some models have fewer false negatives while others are better at avoiding false positives. Since carcinogenicity is typically evaluated using a series of studies, identification of a strategy using one, or preferably a battery of in silico models, could reduce the number of animal studies needed.

KW - alternative methods

KW - carcinogenicity

KW - QSAR

KW - REACH

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857806152&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84857806152&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10590501.2011.629973

DO - 10.1080/10590501.2011.629973

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 300

EP - 323

JO - Environmental Carcinogenesis and Ecotoxicology Reviews

JF - Environmental Carcinogenesis and Ecotoxicology Reviews

SN - 1059-0501

IS - 4

ER -