Structure-based methods for predicting mutagenicity and carcinogenicity: are we there yet?

There is a great deal of current interest in the use of commercial, automated programs for the prediction of mutagenicity and carcinogenicity based on chemical structure. However, the goal of accurate and reliable toxicity prediction for any chemical, based solely on structural information remains elusive. The toxicity prediction challenge is global in its objective, but limited in its solution, to within local domains of chemicals acting according to similar mechanisms of action in the biological system; to predict, we must be able to generalize based on chemical structure, but the biology fundamentally limits our ability to do so. Available commercial systems for mutagenicity and/or carcinogenicity prediction differ in their specifics, yet most fall in two major categories: (1) automated approaches that rely on the use of statistics for extracting correlations between structure and activity; and (2) knowledge-based expert systems that rely on a set of programmed rules distilled from available knowledge and human expert judgement. These two categories of approaches differ in the ways that they represent, process, and generalize chemical-biological activity information. An application of four commercial systems (TOPKAT, CASE/MULTI-CASE, DEREK, and OncoLogic) to mutagenicity and carcinogenicity prediction for a particular class of chemicals-the haloacetic acids (HAs)-is presented to highlight these differences. Some discussion is devoted to the issue of gauging the relative performance of commercial prediction systems, as well as to the role of prospective prediction exercises in this effort. And finally, an alternative approach that stops short of delivering a prediction to a user, involving structure-searching and data base exploration, is briefly considered.