Evaluation of QSAR models for predicting mutagenicity: outcome of the Second Ames/QSAR international challenge project

Quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models are powerful in silico tools for predicting the mutagenicity of unstable compounds, impurities and metabolites that are difficult to examine using the Ames test. Ideally, Ames/QSAR models for regulatory use should demonstrate high sensitivity, low false-negative rate and wide coverage of chemical space. To promote superior model development, the Division of Genetics and Mutagenesis, National Institute of Health Sciences, Japan (DGM/NIHS), conducted the Second Ames/QSAR International Challenge Project (2020-2022) as a successor to the First Project (2014-2017), with 21 teams from 11 countries participating. The DGM/NIHS provided a curated training dataset of approximately 12,000 chemicals and a trial dataset of approximately 1,600 chemicals, and each participating team predicted the Ames mutagenicity of each trial chemical using various Ames/QSAR models. The DGM/NIHS then provided the Ames test results for trial chemicals to assist in model improvement. Although overall model performance on the Second Project was not superior to that on the First, models from the eight teams participating in both projects achieved higher sensitivity than models from teams participating in only the Second Project. Thus, these evaluations have facilitated the development of QSAR models.

Transitioning to composite bacterial mutagenicity models in ICH M7 (Q)SAR analyses

The International Council on Harmonisation (ICH) M7(R1) guideline describes the use of complementary (quantitative) structure-activity relationship ((Q)SAR) models to assess the mutagenic potential of drug impurities in new and generic drugs. Historically, the CASE Ultra and Leadscope software platforms used two different statistical-based models to predict mutations at G-C (guanine-cytosine) and A-T (adenine-thymine) sites, to comprehensively assess bacterial mutagenesis. In the present study, composite bacterial mutagenicity models covering multiple mutation types were developed. These new models contain more than double the number of chemicals (n = 9,254 and n = 13,514) than the corresponding non-composite models and show better toxicophore coverage. Additionally, the use of a single composite bacterial mutagenicity model simplifies impurity analysis in an ICH M7 (Q)SAR workflow by reducing the number of model outputs requiring review. An external validation set of 388 drug impurities representing proprietary pharmaceutical chemical space showed performance statistics ranging from of 66-82% in sensitivity, 91-95% in negative predictivity and 96% in coverage. This effort represents a major enhancement to these (Q)SAR models and their use under ICH M7(R1), leading to improved patient safety through greater predictive accuracy, applicability, and efficiency when assessing the bacterial mutagenic potential of drug impurities.

Improvement of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) tools for predicting Ames mutagenicity: outcomes of the Ames/QSAR International Challenge Project

The International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) M7 guideline allows the use of in silico approaches for predicting Ames mutagenicity for the initial assessment of impurities in pharmaceuticals. This is the first international guideline that addresses the use of quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR) models in lieu of actual toxicological studies for human health assessment. Therefore, QSAR models for Ames mutagenicity now require higher predictive power for identifying mutagenic chemicals. To increase the predictive power of QSAR models, larger experimental datasets from reliable sources are required. The Division of Genetics and Mutagenesis, National Institute of Health Sciences (DGM/NIHS) of Japan recently established a unique proprietary Ames mutagenicity database containing 12140 new chemicals that have not been previously used for developing QSAR models. The DGM/NIHS provided this Ames database to QSAR vendors to validate and improve their QSAR tools. The Ames/QSAR International Challenge Project was initiated in 2014 with 12 QSAR vendors testing 17 QSAR tools against these compounds in three phases. We now present the final results. All tools were considerably improved by participation in this project. Most tools achieved >50% sensitivity (positive prediction among all Ames positives) and predictive power (accuracy) was as high as 80%, almost equivalent to the inter-laboratory reproducibility of Ames tests. To further increase the predictive power of QSAR tools, accumulation of additional Ames test data is required as well as re-evaluation of some previous Ames test results. Indeed, some Ames-positive or Ames-negative chemicals may have previously been incorrectly classified because of methodological weakness, resulting in false-positive or false-negative predictions by QSAR tools. These incorrect data hamper prediction and are a source of noise in the development of QSAR models. It is thus essential to establish a large benchmark database consisting only of well-validated Ames test results to build more accurate QSAR models.

META V. A model of photodegradation for the prediction of photoproducts of chemicals under natural-like conditions

Our goal was to create a photodegradation model based on the META expert system [G. Klopman, M. Dimayuga, J. Talafous, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 34 (1994a) 1320-1325]. This requires the development of a dictionary of photodegradation pathways. Equipped with such a dictionary, we found that META successfully predicts degradation pathways of organic compounds under UV light. Our model was tested on a wide range of industrial compounds for which literature data exists. The results were excellent as the hit/miss ratio was better than 92%. This work complements our previous elaboration of equivalent mammal metabolism, aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation models.