In silico methods combined with expert knowledge rule out mutagenic potential of pharmaceutical impurities: An industry survey

Ashby, 1991, Definitive relationships among chemical structure, carcinogenicity and mutagenicity for 301 chemicals tested by the US NTP, Mutat. Res., 257, 229, 10.1016/0165-1110(91)90003-E Dobo, 2006, The application of structure-based assessment to support safety and chemistry diligence to manage genotoxic impurities in active pharmaceutical ingredients during drug development, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 44, 282, 10.1016/j.yrtph.2006.01.004 European Medicines Agency, Guideline on the Limits of Genotoxic Impurities. 2006. Glowienke, 2010, The evaluation of the gentoxic potential of impurities Greene, 1999, Knowledge-based expert systems for toxicity and metabolism prediction: DEREK, StAR and METEOR, SAR QSAR Environ. Res., 10, 299, 10.1080/10629369908039182 Greene, 2002, Computer systems for the prediction of toxicity: an update, Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev., 54, 417, 10.1016/S0169-409X(02)00012-1 Hansen, 2009, Benchmark data set for in silico prediction of Ames mutagenicity, J. Chem. Inf. Model., 49, 2077, 10.1021/ci900161g Hillebrecht, 2011, Comparative evaluation of in silico systems for ames test mutagenicity prediction: scope and limitations, Chem. Res. Toxicol., 24, 843, 10.1021/tx2000398 Matthews, 1998, A new highly specific method for predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using enhanced MCASE QSAR-ES software, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 28, 242, 10.1006/rtph.1998.1259 Matthews, 2008, Combined use of MC4PC, MDL-QSAR, BioEpisteme, Leadscope PDM, and Derek for Windows Software to achieve high-performance, high-confidence, mode of action-based predictions of chemical carcinogenesis in rodents, Toxicol. Mech. Methods, 18, 189, 10.1080/15376510701857379 Muller, 2006, A rationale for determining, testing, and controlling specific impurities in pharmaceuticals that possess potential for genotoxicity, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 44, 198, 10.1016/j.yrtph.2005.12.001 Naven, 2010, The computational prediction of genotoxicity, Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol., 6, 797, 10.1517/17425255.2010.495118 Pearl, 2001, Integration of computational analysis as a sentinel tool in toxicological assessments, Curr. Top. Med. Chem., 1, 247, 10.2174/1568026013395074 Ridings, 1996, Computer prediction of possible toxic action from chemical structure: an update on the DEREK system, Toxicology, 106, 267, 10.1016/0300-483X(95)03190-Q Rosenkranz, 1990, Evaluating the ability of CASE, an artificial intelligence structure-activity relational system, to predict structural alerts for genotoxicity, Mutagenesis, 5, 525, 10.1093/mutage/5.6.525 Rosenkranz, 1993, Structural relationships between mutagenicity, maximum tolerated dose, and carcinogenicity in rodents, Environ. Mol. Mutagen., 21, 193, 10.1002/em.2850210212 Saiakhov, 2010, Benchmark performance of MultiCASE Inc. software in Ames mutagenicity set, J. Chem. Inf. Model., 50, 1521, 10.1021/ci1000899 Sanderson, 1991, Computer prediction of possible toxic action from chemical structure; the DEREK system, Hum. Exp. Toxicol., 10, 261, 10.1177/096032719101000405 Snyder, 2009, An update on the genotoxicity and carcinogenicity of marketed pharmaceuticals with reference to in silico predictivity, Environ. Mol. Mutagen., 50, 435, 10.1002/em.20485 Snyder, 2004, Assessment of the sensitivity of the computational programs DEREK, TOPKAT, and MCASE in the prediction of the genotoxicity of pharmaceutical molecules, Environ. Mol. Mutagen., 43, 143, 10.1002/em.20013 Teasdale, 2011, Strategies for the evaluation of genotoxic impurity risk United States Food and Drug Administration, Guidance for Industry, Genotoxic and Carciniogenic Impurities in Drug Substance and Drug Products: Recommended Approaches. 2008. White, 2003, A multiple in silico program approach for the prediction of mutagenicity from chemical structure, Mutat. Res., 539, 77, 10.1016/S1383-5718(03)00135-9