Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40358677›Full record

ArticleArchives of toxicology2025

Identifying metabolites of new psychoactive substances using in silico prediction tools.

Romain Pelletier, Dina Nahle, Mareme Sarr, Alexis Bourdais, Isabelle Morel, Brendan Le Daré, Thomas Gicquel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Romain PelletierNuMeCan Institute (Nutrition, Metabolisms and Cancer), CHU Rennes, Univ Rennes, INSERM, INRAE, UMR_A 1341, UMR_S 1317, 35000, Rennes, France. romain.pelletier@chu-rennes.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-3848-507X
Dina NahleNuMeCan Institute (Nutrition, Metabolisms and Cancer), CHU Rennes, Univ Rennes, INSERM, INRAE, UMR_A 1341, UMR_S 1317, 35000, Rennes, France.
Mareme SarrNuMeCan Institute (Nutrition, Metabolisms and Cancer), CHU Rennes, Univ Rennes, INSERM, INRAE, UMR_A 1341, UMR_S 1317, 35000, Rennes, France.
Alexis BourdaisNuMeCan Institute (Nutrition, Metabolisms and Cancer), CHU Rennes, Univ Rennes, INSERM, INRAE, UMR_A 1341, UMR_S 1317, 35000, Rennes, France.
Isabelle MorelNuMeCan Institute (Nutrition, Metabolisms and Cancer), CHU Rennes, Univ Rennes, INSERM, INRAE, UMR_A 1341, UMR_S 1317, 35000, Rennes, France.
Brendan Le DaréNuMeCan Institute (Nutrition, Metabolisms and Cancer), CHU Rennes, Univ Rennes, INSERM, INRAE, UMR_A 1341, UMR_S 1317, 35000, Rennes, France.
Thomas GicquelNuMeCan Institute (Nutrition, Metabolisms and Cancer), CHU Rennes, Univ Rennes, INSERM, INRAE, UMR_A 1341, UMR_S 1317, 35000, Rennes, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Computer SimulationPsychotropic DrugsBiomarkersCannabinoidsDesigner DrugsHumansBiomarkersCannabinoidsDesigner DrugsPsychotropic DrugsBiotransformation pathwaysIn silico metabolism predictionNew psychoactive substances (NPS)Phase I and II metabolismPrediction software comparisonToxicological biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID40358677
PMCPMC12198081

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.