4.3 Article

Decision tree SAR models for developmental toxicity based on an FDA/TERIS database

Journal

SAR AND QSAR IN ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 83-96

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/1062936031000073126

Keywords

decision tree; structure-activity relationships; developmental toxicity; model validation; bagging; FDA/TERIS

Funding

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [ES09460] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Humans are exposed to thousands of environmental chemicals for which no developmental toxicity information is available. Structure-activity relationships (SARs) are models that could be used to efficiently predict the biological activity of potential developmental toxicants. However, at this time, no adequate SAR models of developmental toxicity are available for risk assessment. In the present study, a new developmental database was compiled by combining toxicity information from the Teratogen Information System (TERIS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines. We implemented a decision tree modeling procedure, using Classification and Regression Tree software and a model ensemble approach termed bagging. We then assessed the empirical distributions of the prediction accuracy measures of the single and ensemble-based models, achieved by repeating our modeling experiment many times by repeated random partitioning of the working database. The decision tree developmental SAR models exhibited modest prediction accuracy. Bagging tended to enhance the accuracy of prediction. Also, the model ensemble approach reduced the variability of prediction measures compared to the single model approach. Further research with data derived from animal species- and endpoint-specific components of an extended and refined FDA/TERIS database has the potential to derive SAR models that would be useful in the developmental risk assessment of the thousands of untested chemicals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available