ArticleArchives of toxicology2025
Identifying metabolites of new psychoactive substances using in silico prediction tools.
Article in Archives of toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- N-Ethylpentedrone: first hair detection and human metabolic profiling across multiple biological matrices using UHPLC-HRMS, molecular networking and in silico prediction.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- Emergence of 2-MMC in the French Alps: description of 13 clinical and forensic toxicology cases.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists containing silicon: exploring the metabolic pathways of ADMB- and Cumyl-3TMS-PrINACA in human urine specimens and post mortem material compared to in vitro and in silico data.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- In Silico Forensic Toxicology: Is It Feasible?Toxics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
New psychoactive substances (NPS) pose an increasing challenge for clinical and forensic toxicology due to the initial lack of analytical and metabolic data. This study evaluates the performance of four in silico prediction tools (GLORYx, BioTransformer 3.0, SyGMa, and MetaTrans) in predicting the metabolism of seven NPS from five major chemical families (cathinones, synthetic cannabinoids, synthetic opioids, designer benzodiazepines, and dissociative anesthetics). The predicted metabolites were compared to those reported in the literature. The results revealed that SyGMa was the most exhaustive tool, predicting 437 metabolites, whereas MetaTrans predicted the fewest (61). GLORYx uniquely identified glutathione conjugation, while BioTransformer was particularly effective in predicting phase I reactions. However, no single tool provided complete predictions. Combining the four tools enabled the identification of several key biomarkers consistent with experimental data, such as m/z 238.1443 for eutylone and m/z 381.1926 for etonitazepipne. These findings highlight the need for integrated approaches to optimize metabolite prediction. Future advancements in artificial intelligence-based models could reduce false positives and enhance the accuracy of predictions, thus reinforcing the role of in silico tools in toxicological investigations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.