한국환경보건학회지 (Journal of Environmental Health Sciences)

  • 제45권5호
  • /
  • Pages.457-464
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 1738-4087(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2233-8616(eISSN)
한국환경보건학회 (Korean Society of Environmental Health)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

TOPKAT®, Derek®, OECD toolbox를 활용한 화학물질 독성 예측 연구

Toxicity Prediction using Three Quantitative Structure-activity Relationship (QSAR) Programs (TOPKAT®, Derek®, OECD toolbox)

  • 투고 : 2019.07.01
  • 심사 : 2019.08.07
  • 발행 : 2019.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objectives: Quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) is one of the effective alternatives to animal testing, but its credibility in terms of toxicity prediction has been questionable. Thus, this work aims to evaluate its predictive capacity and find ways of improving its credibility. Methods: Using $TOPKAT^{(R)}$, OECD toolbox, and $Derek^{(R)}$, all of which have been applied world-wide in the research, industrial, and regulatory fields, an analysis of prediction credibility markers including accuracy (A), sensitivity (S), specificity (SP), false negative (FN), and false positive (FP) was conducted. Results: The multi-application of QSARs elevated the precision credibility relative to individual applications of QSARs. Moreover, we found that the type of chemical structure affects the credibility of markers significantly. Conclusions: The credibility of individual QSAR is insufficient for both the prediction of chemical toxicity and regulation of hazardous chemicals. Thus, to increase the credibility, multi-QSAR application, and compensation of the prediction deviation by chemical structure are required.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Ganesan S, Vasudevan N. Impacts of perfluorinated compounds on human health. Bull. Env. Pharmacol. Life Sci. 2015; 4: 183-191.
  2. Lee JW, Lee J-W, Kim K, Shin YJ, Kim J, Kim H, et al. n-Butyl acrylate-induced antioxidant system alteration through two generations in Oryzias latipes. 2018; doi: 10.1007/s10695-018-0584-z.
  3. Lee JW, Shin YJ, Kim H, Kim H, Kim J, Min SA, et al. Metformin-induced endocrine disruption and oxidative stress of Oryzias latipes on two-generational condition. J Hazard Mater. 2019; 5:171-181.
  4. Korean Society of Environmental Health (KSEH), Environmental Health, 1st ed, Seoul, Episteme Press, 2016, p. 19-33.
  5. Ministry of Environment (MOE). Act on the Registration and Evaluation, etc. of Chemical Substance. Available: http://www.law.go.kr/??/[accessed 01 June 2019]
  6. Kim K-Y, Shin SE, No KT. Assessment of quantitative structure-activity relationship of toxicity prediction models for Korean Chemical substance control legislation. Environ Heal Toxicol. 2015; 30: Article ID:s2015007, 10 page https://doi.org/10.5620/eht.e2015002
  7. Korea Development Institute (KDI). Analysis report: the effect of domestic industry according to EU-REACH legislation. Available: http://www.prism.go.kr/homepage/researchCommon/retrieveResearchDetailPopup.do;jsessionid=53B47AF8E1BB6 B007845C668E9DAF279.node02?research_id=1480000-200700151 [cited 2014 Dec 15].
  8. Kim J, Seo, J-K, Kim T, Kim, H-K, Park, S, Kim P-J. Prediction of human health and ecotoxicity of chemical substances using the OECD QSAR application toolbox. J Environ Health Sci. 2013; 39: 130-137.
  9. Sung CH, Park SY, Lee JW, Yu SD, Kim PJ, Jang S-W, et al. A study for the improvement of a prediction using QSAR models to find out hazardous substances (I) (2018). Available: http://library.me.go.kr/search/DetailView.ax?sid=1&cid=5677755 [accessed 01 June 2019]
  10. Jang T-S, Shin S-K, Kim H. Estimation of Physicochemical and Eco-toxicological properties of pharmaceuticals by QSAR approach. J Korean Society for Environmental Analysis. 2010; 13: 45-53
  11. Mays C, Benfenati E, Pardoe S. Use and perceived benefits and barriers of QSAR models for REACH: findings from a questionnaire to stakeholders. Chem Cent J. 2012; 6(1): 159 https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-153X-6-159
  12. Sung ND. Development of new agrochemicals by quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) methodology, 3D QSAR methodologies and computer-assisted molecular design (CAMD). Korean J Pestic Sci. 2003; 03: 1-11.
  13. Cariello NF, Wilson JD, Britt BH, Wedd DJ, Burlinson B, Gombar V. Comparison of the computer programs DEREK and TOPKAT to predict bacterial mutagenicity. Mutagenesis. 2002; 17(4):321-329. https://doi.org/10.1093/mutage/17.4.321
  14. Kim J, Choi K, Kim K, Kim D. QSAR approach for toxicity prediction of chemicals used in electronics industries. J Environ Health Sci. 2014; 40:105-113.
  15. Kim HK, Kim JY, Cha HK, Park MY, Sung CH, Kim PL. A study on the best application of (Q)SARs to predict aquatic toxicity of organic chemicals (2010). Available: http://library.me.go.kr/search/DetailView.ax?sid=1&cid=5256608 [accessed 01 June 2019]
  16. Klimisch HJ, Andreae M, Tillmann U. A systematic approach for evaluating the quality of experimental toxicological and ecotoxicological data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 1997; 25: 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1006/rtph.1996.1076
  17. Sung CH, Park SY, Kim KT, Kim KH, Sung MH, Moon SA, et al. Study on the improvement of mutagenicity prediction using QSARs models (2016). Available: http://library.me.go.kr/search/DetailView.ax?sid=1&cid=5638480 [accessed 01 June 2019]
  18. Sung CH, Park SY, Choi YS, Kim HK, Sung MH, Moon SA, et al. Study on the improvement of genotoxicity prediction using QSARs models (2017). Available: http://library.me.go.kr/search/DetailView.ax?sid=1&cid=5667023 [accessed 01 June 2019]