4.5 Article

Screening of 397 chemicals and development of a quantitative structure-activity relationship model for androgen receptor antagonism

Journal

CHEMICAL RESEARCH IN TOXICOLOGY
Volume 21, Issue 4, Pages 813-823

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/tx7002382

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have screened 397 chemicals for human androgen receptor (AR) antagonism by a sensitive reporter gene assay to generate data for the development of a quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) model. A total of 523 chemicals comprising data on 292 chemicals from our laboratory and data on 231 chemicals from the literature constituted the training set for the model. The chemicals were selected with the purpose of representing a wide range of chemical structures (e.g., organochlorines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) and various functions (e.g., natural hormones, pesticides, plastizicers, plastic additives, brominated flame retardants, and roast mutagens). In addition, the intention was to obtain an equal number of positive and negative chemicals. Among our own data for the training set, 45.7% exhibited inhibitory activity against the transcriptional activity induced by the synthetic androgen R1881. The MultiCASE expert system was used to construct a QSAR model for AR antagonizing potential. A 5 Times, 2-Fold 50% Cross Validation of the model showed a sensitivity of 64%, a specificity of 84%, and a concordance of 76%. Data for 102 chemicals were generated for an external validation of the model resulting in a sensitivity of 57%, a specificity of 98%, and a concordance of 92% of the model. The model was run on a set of 176103 chemicals, and 47% were within the domain of the model. Approximately 8% of chemicals was predicted active for AR antagonism. We conclude that the predictability of the global QSAR model for this end point is good. This most comprehensive QSAR model may become a valuable tool for screening large numbers of chemicals for AR antagonism.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available