Loading…
How to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions can be trusted: a novel approach for establishing a model's applicability domain
The EU REACH legislation, the OECD and US EPA official guidance documents, as well as the 3Rs principle (replacement, reduction, refinement of animal testing), all advocate the necessity of developing comprehensive computational methods ( e.g. quantitative structure-activity relationship, read-acros...
Saved in:
Published in: | Environmental science. Nano 2018, Vol.5 (2), p.48-421 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-501263c383293643c92384b88d72dede013e8680c8f93783540377d72672b84a3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-501263c383293643c92384b88d72dede013e8680c8f93783540377d72672b84a3 |
container_end_page | 421 |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 48 |
container_title | Environmental science. Nano |
container_volume | 5 |
creator | Gajewicz, A |
description | The EU REACH legislation, the OECD and US EPA official guidance documents, as well as the 3Rs principle (replacement, reduction, refinement of animal testing), all advocate the necessity of developing comprehensive computational methods (
e.g.
quantitative structure-activity relationship, read-across) that would enable the predictive modeling of both chemical (
e.g.
nanoparticle) specific functionalities and their hazards. However, since computational (nano)toxicology continues to '
learn on the fly
' and relies on the use of a vast array of innovative machine-learning algorithms, serious concerns about the reliability of
in silico
predictions are raised. This study aimed to give an answer to the following question: how to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions are reliable. Here, an effective approach for graphical assessment of the limits of a model's reliable predictions (so-called applicability domain, AD) was introduced. The probability-oriented distance-based approach (AD
ProbDist
) was proposed as a robust and automatic method for defining the interpolation space where true and reliable predictions can be expected. Its usefulness was confirmed by using four nano-QSAR/read-across models recently reported in the literature. The results of the study showed that the AD
ProbDist
approach is more restrictive in terms of the chemical space that falls in the AD of a model than the range, geometrical, distance and leverage approaches. The advantages of the proposed AD
ProbDist
approach include (but are not limited to) the fact that it works with relatively small datasets and enables the identification of (un)reliable predictions for newly screened chemicals without experimental data. Further, to facilitate the use of the AD
ProbDist
approach, this study provides the developed in-house
R
-codes.
Probability-oriented distance-based approach (AD
ProbDist
) for determining the nano-QSAR/read-across model's applicability domain where true and reliable predictions can be expected. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1039/c7en00774d |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_rsc_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_rsc_primary_c7en00774d</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2010870881</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-501263c383293643c92384b88d72dede013e8680c8f93783540377d72672b84a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkd9LwzAQx4soOOZefBcCPghC3SVpm9S3MacTRPHXc0mTdM3ompq0jr36l9ttMp_u4D7cfb_fC4JzDDcYaDqWTNcAjEXqKBgQiHHIcYKPD31MT4OR90sAwJjENGGD4Gdu16i1aNmphUbrUrelduj1ffI2dlqoUEhnvUeN08rI1tjaIylqlGvUus63Wt0igWr7rSskmsZZIUtUWIe0b0VeGV-aetETK6t0deW3TGWkyE1l2g1SdiVMfRacFKLyevRXh8Hn_exjOg-fXh4ep5OnUFJgbRgDJgmVlFOS0iSiMiWURznnihGllQZMNU84SF6klHEaR0AZ64cJIzmPBB0Gl_u9vcyvrheYLW3n6v5kRgADZ8A57qnrPbUz7nSRNc6shNtkGLJtzNmUzZ53Md_18MUedl4euP830F-3wniZ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2010870881</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions can be trusted: a novel approach for establishing a model's applicability domain</title><source>Royal Society of Chemistry:Jisc Collections:Royal Society of Chemistry Read and Publish 2022-2024 (reading list)</source><creator>Gajewicz, A</creator><creatorcontrib>Gajewicz, A</creatorcontrib><description>The EU REACH legislation, the OECD and US EPA official guidance documents, as well as the 3Rs principle (replacement, reduction, refinement of animal testing), all advocate the necessity of developing comprehensive computational methods (
e.g.
quantitative structure-activity relationship, read-across) that would enable the predictive modeling of both chemical (
e.g.
nanoparticle) specific functionalities and their hazards. However, since computational (nano)toxicology continues to '
learn on the fly
' and relies on the use of a vast array of innovative machine-learning algorithms, serious concerns about the reliability of
in silico
predictions are raised. This study aimed to give an answer to the following question: how to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions are reliable. Here, an effective approach for graphical assessment of the limits of a model's reliable predictions (so-called applicability domain, AD) was introduced. The probability-oriented distance-based approach (AD
ProbDist
) was proposed as a robust and automatic method for defining the interpolation space where true and reliable predictions can be expected. Its usefulness was confirmed by using four nano-QSAR/read-across models recently reported in the literature. The results of the study showed that the AD
ProbDist
approach is more restrictive in terms of the chemical space that falls in the AD of a model than the range, geometrical, distance and leverage approaches. The advantages of the proposed AD
ProbDist
approach include (but are not limited to) the fact that it works with relatively small datasets and enables the identification of (un)reliable predictions for newly screened chemicals without experimental data. Further, to facilitate the use of the AD
ProbDist
approach, this study provides the developed in-house
R
-codes.
Probability-oriented distance-based approach (AD
ProbDist
) for determining the nano-QSAR/read-across model's applicability domain where true and reliable predictions can be expected.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2051-8153</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2051-8161</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1039/c7en00774d</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry</publisher><subject>Computation ; Computer applications ; Distance ; Learning algorithms ; Legislation ; Machine learning ; Modelling ; Nanoparticles ; Prediction models ; Probability theory ; Structure-activity relationships ; Toxic hazards ; Toxicology</subject><ispartof>Environmental science. Nano, 2018, Vol.5 (2), p.48-421</ispartof><rights>Copyright Royal Society of Chemistry 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-501263c383293643c92384b88d72dede013e8680c8f93783540377d72672b84a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-501263c383293643c92384b88d72dede013e8680c8f93783540377d72672b84a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7702-210X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,4010,27900,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gajewicz, A</creatorcontrib><title>How to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions can be trusted: a novel approach for establishing a model's applicability domain</title><title>Environmental science. Nano</title><description>The EU REACH legislation, the OECD and US EPA official guidance documents, as well as the 3Rs principle (replacement, reduction, refinement of animal testing), all advocate the necessity of developing comprehensive computational methods (
e.g.
quantitative structure-activity relationship, read-across) that would enable the predictive modeling of both chemical (
e.g.
nanoparticle) specific functionalities and their hazards. However, since computational (nano)toxicology continues to '
learn on the fly
' and relies on the use of a vast array of innovative machine-learning algorithms, serious concerns about the reliability of
in silico
predictions are raised. This study aimed to give an answer to the following question: how to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions are reliable. Here, an effective approach for graphical assessment of the limits of a model's reliable predictions (so-called applicability domain, AD) was introduced. The probability-oriented distance-based approach (AD
ProbDist
) was proposed as a robust and automatic method for defining the interpolation space where true and reliable predictions can be expected. Its usefulness was confirmed by using four nano-QSAR/read-across models recently reported in the literature. The results of the study showed that the AD
ProbDist
approach is more restrictive in terms of the chemical space that falls in the AD of a model than the range, geometrical, distance and leverage approaches. The advantages of the proposed AD
ProbDist
approach include (but are not limited to) the fact that it works with relatively small datasets and enables the identification of (un)reliable predictions for newly screened chemicals without experimental data. Further, to facilitate the use of the AD
ProbDist
approach, this study provides the developed in-house
R
-codes.
Probability-oriented distance-based approach (AD
ProbDist
) for determining the nano-QSAR/read-across model's applicability domain where true and reliable predictions can be expected.</description><subject>Computation</subject><subject>Computer applications</subject><subject>Distance</subject><subject>Learning algorithms</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Nanoparticles</subject><subject>Prediction models</subject><subject>Probability theory</subject><subject>Structure-activity relationships</subject><subject>Toxic hazards</subject><subject>Toxicology</subject><issn>2051-8153</issn><issn>2051-8161</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpFkd9LwzAQx4soOOZefBcCPghC3SVpm9S3MacTRPHXc0mTdM3ompq0jr36l9ttMp_u4D7cfb_fC4JzDDcYaDqWTNcAjEXqKBgQiHHIcYKPD31MT4OR90sAwJjENGGD4Gdu16i1aNmphUbrUrelduj1ffI2dlqoUEhnvUeN08rI1tjaIylqlGvUus63Wt0igWr7rSskmsZZIUtUWIe0b0VeGV-aetETK6t0deW3TGWkyE1l2g1SdiVMfRacFKLyevRXh8Hn_exjOg-fXh4ep5OnUFJgbRgDJgmVlFOS0iSiMiWURznnihGllQZMNU84SF6klHEaR0AZ64cJIzmPBB0Gl_u9vcyvrheYLW3n6v5kRgADZ8A57qnrPbUz7nSRNc6shNtkGLJtzNmUzZ53Md_18MUedl4euP830F-3wniZ</recordid><startdate>2018</startdate><enddate>2018</enddate><creator>Gajewicz, A</creator><general>Royal Society of Chemistry</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7702-210X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>2018</creationdate><title>How to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions can be trusted: a novel approach for establishing a model's applicability domain</title><author>Gajewicz, A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-501263c383293643c92384b88d72dede013e8680c8f93783540377d72672b84a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Computation</topic><topic>Computer applications</topic><topic>Distance</topic><topic>Learning algorithms</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Nanoparticles</topic><topic>Prediction models</topic><topic>Probability theory</topic><topic>Structure-activity relationships</topic><topic>Toxic hazards</topic><topic>Toxicology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gajewicz, A</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Environmental science. Nano</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gajewicz, A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions can be trusted: a novel approach for establishing a model's applicability domain</atitle><jtitle>Environmental science. Nano</jtitle><date>2018</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>48</spage><epage>421</epage><pages>48-421</pages><issn>2051-8153</issn><eissn>2051-8161</eissn><abstract>The EU REACH legislation, the OECD and US EPA official guidance documents, as well as the 3Rs principle (replacement, reduction, refinement of animal testing), all advocate the necessity of developing comprehensive computational methods (
e.g.
quantitative structure-activity relationship, read-across) that would enable the predictive modeling of both chemical (
e.g.
nanoparticle) specific functionalities and their hazards. However, since computational (nano)toxicology continues to '
learn on the fly
' and relies on the use of a vast array of innovative machine-learning algorithms, serious concerns about the reliability of
in silico
predictions are raised. This study aimed to give an answer to the following question: how to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions are reliable. Here, an effective approach for graphical assessment of the limits of a model's reliable predictions (so-called applicability domain, AD) was introduced. The probability-oriented distance-based approach (AD
ProbDist
) was proposed as a robust and automatic method for defining the interpolation space where true and reliable predictions can be expected. Its usefulness was confirmed by using four nano-QSAR/read-across models recently reported in the literature. The results of the study showed that the AD
ProbDist
approach is more restrictive in terms of the chemical space that falls in the AD of a model than the range, geometrical, distance and leverage approaches. The advantages of the proposed AD
ProbDist
approach include (but are not limited to) the fact that it works with relatively small datasets and enables the identification of (un)reliable predictions for newly screened chemicals without experimental data. Further, to facilitate the use of the AD
ProbDist
approach, this study provides the developed in-house
R
-codes.
Probability-oriented distance-based approach (AD
ProbDist
) for determining the nano-QSAR/read-across model's applicability domain where true and reliable predictions can be expected.</abstract><cop>Cambridge</cop><pub>Royal Society of Chemistry</pub><doi>10.1039/c7en00774d</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7702-210X</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2051-8153 |
ispartof | Environmental science. Nano, 2018, Vol.5 (2), p.48-421 |
issn | 2051-8153 2051-8161 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_rsc_primary_c7en00774d |
source | Royal Society of Chemistry:Jisc Collections:Royal Society of Chemistry Read and Publish 2022-2024 (reading list) |
subjects | Computation Computer applications Distance Learning algorithms Legislation Machine learning Modelling Nanoparticles Prediction models Probability theory Structure-activity relationships Toxic hazards Toxicology |
title | How to judge whether QSAR/read-across predictions can be trusted: a novel approach for establishing a model's applicability domain |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T14%3A02%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_rsc_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20to%20judge%20whether%20QSAR/read-across%20predictions%20can%20be%20trusted:%20a%20novel%20approach%20for%20establishing%20a%20model's%20applicability%20domain&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20science.%20Nano&rft.au=Gajewicz,%20A&rft.date=2018&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=48&rft.epage=421&rft.pages=48-421&rft.issn=2051-8153&rft.eissn=2051-8161&rft_id=info:doi/10.1039/c7en00774d&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_rsc_p%3E2010870881%3C/proquest_rsc_p%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-501263c383293643c92384b88d72dede013e8680c8f93783540377d72672b84a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2010870881&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |