Jagiello Karolina, Grzonkowska Monika, Swirog Marta, Ahmed Lucky, Rasulev Bakhtiyor, Avramopoulos Aggelos, Papadopoulos Manthos G, Leszczynski Jerzy, Puzyn Tomasz
Laboratory of Environmental Chemometrics, Faculty of Chemistry, Institute for Environmental and Human Health Protection, University of Gdansk, Wita Stwosza 63, 80-308 Gdansk, Poland.
Interdisciplinary Nanotoxicity Center, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Jackson State University, 1400 JR Lynch Street, Jackson, MS 39217-0510 USA.
J Nanopart Res. 2016;18(9):256. doi: 10.1007/s11051-016-3564-1. Epub 2016 Aug 29.
In this contribution, the advantages and limitations of two computational techniques that can be used for the investigation of nanoparticles activity and toxicity: classic nano-QSAR (Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships employed for nanomaterials) and 3D nano-QSAR (three-dimensional Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships, such us Comparative Molecular Field Analysis, CoMFA/Comparative Molecular Similarity Indices Analysis, CoMSIA analysis employed for nanomaterials) have been briefly summarized. Both approaches were compared according to the selected criteria, including: efficiency, type of experimental data, class of nanomaterials, time required for calculations and computational cost, difficulties in the interpretation. Taking into account the advantages and limitations of each method, we provide the recommendations for nano-QSAR modellers and QSAR model users to be able to determine a proper and efficient methodology to investigate biological activity of nanoparticles in order to describe the underlying interactions in the most reliable and useful manner.
在本论文中,简要总结了可用于研究纳米颗粒活性和毒性的两种计算技术的优点和局限性:经典纳米QSAR(用于纳米材料的定量构效关系)和3D纳米QSAR(三维定量构效关系,例如用于纳米材料的比较分子场分析、CoMFA/比较分子相似性指数分析、CoMSIA分析)。根据所选标准对这两种方法进行了比较,包括:效率、实验数据类型、纳米材料类别、计算所需时间和计算成本、解释难度。考虑到每种方法的优缺点,我们为纳米QSAR建模者和QSAR模型使用者提供了建议,以便能够确定一种合适且高效的方法来研究纳米颗粒的生物活性,从而以最可靠和有用的方式描述潜在的相互作用。