Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to content


Metadata Updated: May 2, 2021

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is estimated to constitute about 10-15% of all occupational diseases. Predictive testing to characterise substances for their skin sensitisation potential has historically been based on animal models such as the Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA) and the Guinea Pig Maximisation Test (GPMT). In recent years, EU regulations, have provided a strong incentive to develop non-animal alternatives. Significant progress has been made in developing and evaluating non-animal test methods. There have been efforts to develop and evaluate the utility of in silico models for skin sensitisation including local and global (Q)SARs as well as expert systems. In this study, we selected three different types of expert systems: VEGA (statistical), Derek Nexus (knowledge based), TIMES-SS (hybrid) and evaluated their performance using 2 large datasets of substances that had been assessed for their skin sensitisation potential in animal models. We considered a model to be successful at predicting skin sensitisation potential if it had at least the same balanced accuracy as the LLNA and the GPMT had in predicting the outcomes of one another, which ranged from 79% to 86% depending on the dataset. We found that none of the expert systems evaluated was able to achieve such a high balanced accuracy in their global predictions, with balanced accuracies ranging from 56% to 65%. However, for substances within the domain of TIMES-SS, balanced accuracies were found to be 79% and 82%, for the two datasets, in line with the animal data. The expert systems evaluated could be extended in light of the additional data collected as part of this study. The incorrect predictions offer new insights for how the existing alerts within these expert systems could be refined. These datasets also offer exciting opportunities for the development of new models.

This dataset is associated with the following publication: Fitzpatrick, J., D. Roberts, and G. Patlewicz. (SAR and QSAR in ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH) An evaluation of selected (Q)SARs/expert systems for predicting skin sensitisation potential. SAR AND QSAR IN ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH. Taylor & Francis, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA, 29(6): 439-468, (2018).

Access & Use Information

Public: This dataset is intended for public access and use. License: See this page for license information.

Downloads & Resources



Metadata Created Date November 12, 2020
Metadata Updated Date May 2, 2021

Metadata Source

Harvested from EPA ScienceHub

Additional Metadata

Resource Type Dataset
Metadata Created Date November 12, 2020
Metadata Updated Date May 2, 2021
Publisher U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD)
Data Last Modified 2018-05-02
Public Access Level public
Bureau Code 020:00
Schema Version
Harvest Object Id 57f42f64-0332-4a68-92cc-0b2e23efe494
Harvest Source Id 04b59eaf-ae53-4066-93db-80f2ed0df446
Harvest Source Title EPA ScienceHub
Program Code 020:095
Publisher Hierarchy U.S. Government > U.S. Environmental Protection Agency > U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD)
Related Documents
Source Datajson Identifier True
Source Hash 962e87adaaf8822452693102dc8d3bfceb51f4b8
Source Schema Version 1.1

Didn't find what you're looking for? Suggest a dataset here.