Abstract
Abstract
Background
Aromatic amines, often used as intermediates for pharmaceutical synthesis, may be mutagenic and therefore pose a challenge as metabolites or impurities in drug development. However, predicting the mutagenicity of aromatic amines using commercially available, quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR) tools is difficult and often requires expert review. In this study, we developed a shareable QSAR tool based on nitrenium ion stability.
Results
The evaluation using in-house aromatic amine intermediates revealed that our model has prediction accuracy of aromatic amine mutagenicity comparable to that of commercial QSAR tools. The effect of changing the number and position of substituents on the mutagenicity of aromatic amines was successfully explained by the change in the nitrenium ion stability. Furthermore, case studies showed that our QSAR tool can support the expert review with quantitative indicators.
Conclusions
This local QSAR tool will be useful as a quantitative support tool to explain the substituent effects on the mutagenicity of primary aromatic amines. By further refinement through method sharing and standardization, our tool can support the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) M7 expert review with quantitative indicators.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Environmental Science (miscellaneous),Genetics,Social Psychology
Reference38 articles.
1. ICH. ICH harmonized guideline. Assessment and control of DNA Reactive (Mutagenic) Impurities in Pharmaceuticals to Limit Potential Carcinogenic Risk. Current Step 4 version dated 31 March 2017. https://www.ich.org/home.html. Accessed 31 Jan 2022.
2. Honma M, Kitazawa A, Cayley A, Williams RV, Barber C, Hanser T, et al. Improvement of quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR) tools for predicting Ames mutagenicity: outcomes of the Ames/QSAR international challenge project. Mutagenesis. 2019;34(1):3–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/mutage/gey031.
3. Hasselgren C, Bercu J, Cayley A, Cross K, Glowienke S, Kruhlak N, et al. Management of pharmaceutical ICH M7 (Q)SAR predictions – the impact of model updates. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2020;118:104807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104807.
4. Ahlberg E, Amberg A, Beilke LD, Bower D, Cross KP, Custer L, et al. Extending (Q)SARs to incorporate proprietary knowledge for regulatory purposes: a case study using aromatic amine mutagenicity. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2016;77:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.02.003.
5. Patel M, Kranz M, Munoz-Muriedas J, Harvey JS, Giddings A, Swallow S, et al. A pharma-wide approach to address the genotoxicity prediction of primary aromatic amines. Comput Toxicol. 2018;7:27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comtox.2018.06.002.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献