Joint Research Centre , Directorate F-Health, Consumers, and Reference Materials, F.3 Chemicals Safety & Alternative Methods, TP 126, Via E. Fermi, 2749, I-21027 Ispra, Italy.
United States Environmental Protection Agency , 1 Sabine Island Drive, Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561, United States.
Environ Sci Technol. 2017 Sep 5;51(17):10203-10211. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b02337. Epub 2017 Aug 16.
The mode of toxic action (MOA) is recognized as a key determinant of chemical toxicity and as an alternative to chemical class-based predictive toxicity modeling. However, MOA classification has never been standardized in ecotoxicology, and a comprehensive comparison of classification tools and approaches has never been reported. Here we critically evaluate three MOA classification methodologies using an aquatic toxicity data set of 3448 chemicals, compare the approaches, and assess utility and limitations in screening and early tier assessments. The comparisons focused on three commonly used tools: Verhaar prediction of toxicity MOA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ASsessment Tool for Evaluating Risk (ASTER) QSAR (quantitative structure activity relationship) application, and the EPA Mode of Action and Toxicity (MOAtox) database. Of the 3448 MOAs predicted using the Verhaar scheme, 1165 were classified by ASTER, and 802 were available in MOAtox. Of the subset of 432 chemicals with MOA assignments for each of the three schemes, 42% had complete concordance in MOA classification, and there was no agreement for 7% of the chemicals. The research shows the potential for large differences in MOA classification between the five broad groups of the Verhaar scheme and the more mechanism-based assignments of ASTER and MOAtox. Harmonization of classification schemes is needed to use MOA classification in chemical hazard and risk assessment more broadly.
毒性作用模式(MOA)被认为是化学毒性的关键决定因素,也是替代基于化学类别进行预测性毒性建模的方法。然而,在生态毒理学中,MOA 分类从未标准化,也从未有过对分类工具和方法的全面比较。在这里,我们使用 3448 种化学物质的水生毒性数据集,对三种 MOA 分类方法进行了批判性评估,比较了这些方法,并评估了其在筛选和早期分层评估中的实用性和局限性。这些比较集中在三种常用工具上:毒性 MOA 的 Verhaar 预测、美国环境保护署(EPA)用于评估风险的评估工具(ASTER)定量结构活性关系(QSAR)应用,以及 EPA 作用模式和毒性(MOAtox)数据库。在使用 Verhaar 方案预测的 3448 种 MOA 中,有 1165 种被 ASTER 分类,802 种在 MOAtox 中可用。在三种方案都有 MOA 分配的 432 种化学物质的子集中,42%的 MOA 分类完全一致,有 7%的化学物质没有一致的分类。研究表明,Verhaar 方案的五个广泛类别和 ASTER 和 MOAtox 的更基于机制的分配之间,MOA 分类可能存在很大差异。需要对分类方案进行协调,以便更广泛地将 MOA 分类用于化学危害和风险评估。