Back

Analytical Choices Drive Toxicogenomic Potency Estimates: A Systematic Evaluation of Transcriptomic Points of Departure

Bruns, I. B.; Schultz, D. R.; Demuynck, E.; Dewulf, F.; Theologidis, I.; Kunnen, S. J.; Wijaya, L. S.; Frydas, I.; Papaioannou, N.; Renieri, E.; Papageorgiou, T.; Sarigiannis, D.; Machera, K.; Mertens, B.; Asselman, J.; Weiss, C.; van de Water, B.; Callegaro, G.

2026-05-31 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.05.27.728212 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Omics technologies are increasingly integrated into next-generation risk assessment, yet quantitative toxicogenomics outcomes remain highly dependent on analytical choices, motivating a systematic evaluation of how bioinformatics workflows influence hazard characterization and transcriptomic Points of Departure (tPOD). Here, we applied five independent transcriptomics pipelines to a shared dataset of RPTEC-TERT1 kidney cells exposed to cisplatin across multiple concentrations and timepoints, comparing effects of pre-processing, benchmark concentration modeling, and pathway-based interpretation strategies. Across workflows, substantial variability was observed in gene-level benchmark concentrations (BMCs), primarily driven by differences in normalization, filtering, and especially the modeling software used. Despite this variability, convergence increased at later timepoints as transcriptional responses strengthened, with 24 h consistently identified as the most sensitive timepoint at the gene level. Aggregation of gene-level BMCs into pathway-based metrics reduced variability but did not eliminate it, with pathway definition emerging as a major determinant of sensitivity estimates. Notably, distinct pathway resources showed minimal gene overlap, and smaller, biologically coherent gene sets (e.g., co-expression modules and biomarker panels) produced lower and less dispersed BMCs compared with broader pathway annotations. Furthermore, direct modeling of pathway activity scores yielded systematically different sensitivity estimates relative to median-based aggregation, with method-dependent conservativeness influenced by pathway coverage and response strength. Overall, our findings demonstrate that both analytical workflow design and pathway selection critically shape toxicogenomic-derived potency estimates, highlighting the need for harmonized, transparent methodologies to enable robust application of transcriptomics in chemical safety assessment and regulatory decision-making.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Environment International
42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
2
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
10.1%
3
Toxicological Sciences
38 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.8%
4
Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
5
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.3%
6
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 29%
6.3%
7
Journal of Hazardous Materials
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 19%
6.3%
9
Environmental Science & Technology Letters
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
10
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.7%
11
Water Research
74 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.4%
12
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 9%
2.1%
13
Environmental Research
46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
14
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
15
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 52%
0.9%
16
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.9%
17
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
18
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 22%
0.9%
19
Clinical and Translational Science
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
20
Cancer Research Communications
46 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
21
ACS Synthetic Biology
256 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
22
Archives of Toxicology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
23
Journal of Neurotrauma
27 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%
24
Environmental Health Perspectives
17 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%