MutAIT: an online genetic toxicology data portal and analysis tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessment of genetic toxicity and/or carcinogenic activity is an essential element of chemical screening programs employed to protect human health. Dose-response and gene mutation data are frequently analysed by industry, academia and governmental agencies for regulatory evaluations and decision making. Over the years, a number of efforts at different institutions have led to the creation and curation of databases to house genetic toxicology data, largely, with the aim of providing public access to facilitate research and regulatory assessments. This article provides a brief introduction to a new genetic toxicology portal called Mutation Analysis Informatics Tools (MutAIT) (www.mutait.org) that provides easy access to two of the largest genetic toxicology databases, the Mammalian Gene Mutation Database (MGMD) and TransgenicDB. TransgenicDB is a comprehensive collection of transgenic rodent mutation data initially compiled and collated by Health Canada. The updated MGMD contains approximately 50 000 individual mutation spectral records from the published literature. The portal not only gives access to an enormous quantity of genetic toxicology data, but also provides statistical tools for dose-response analysis and calculation of benchmark dose. Two important R packages for dose-response analysis are provided as web-distributed applications with user-friendly graphical interfaces. The 'drsmooth' package performs dose-response shape analysis and determines various points of departure (PoD) metrics and the 'PROAST' package provides algorithms for dose-response modelling. The MutAIT statistical tools, which are currently being enhanced, provide users with an efficient and comprehensive platform to conduct quantitative dose-response analyses and determine PoD values that can then be used to calculate human exposure limits or margins of exposure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.069 | 0.038 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".