Article

Mechanistic validation.

Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, CAAT, Baltimore, USA.
ALTEX: Alternativen zu Tierexperimenten (Impact Factor: 0.92). 01/2013; 30(2):119-30.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Validation of new approaches in regulatory toxicology is commonly defined as the independent assessment of the reproducibility and relevance (the scientific basis and predictive capacity) of a test for a particular purpose. In large ring trials, the emphasis to date has been mainly on reproducibility and predictive capacity (comparison to the traditional test) with less attention given to the scientific or mechanistic basis. Assessing predictive capacity is difficult for novel approaches (which are based on mechanism), such as pathways of toxicity or the complex networks within the organism (systems toxicology). This is highly relevant for implementing Toxicology for the 21st Century, either by high-throughput testing in the ToxCast/Tox21 project or omics-based testing in the Human Toxome Project. This article explores the mostly neglected assessment of a test's scientific basis, which moves mechanism and causality to the foreground when validating/qualifying tests. Such mechanistic validation faces the problem of establishing causality in complex systems. However, pragmatic adaptations of the Bradford Hill criteria, as well as bioinformatic tools, are emerging. As critical infrastructures of the organism are perturbed by a toxic mechanism we argue that by focusing on the target of toxicity and its vulnerability, in addition to the way it is perturbed, we can anchor the identification of the mechanism and its verification.

0 Followers
 · 
78 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Human Toxome Project, funded as an NIH Transformative Research grant 2011-2016, is focused on developing the concepts and the means for deducing, validating and sharing molecular pathways of toxicity (PoT). Using the test case of estrogenic endocrine disruption, the responses of MCF-7 human breast cancer cells are being phenotyped by transcriptomics and mass-spectroscopy-based metabolomics. The bioinformatics tools for PoT deduction represent a core deliverable. A number of challenges for quality and standardization of cell systems, omics technologies and bioinformatics are being addressed. In parallel, concepts for annotation, validation and sharing of PoT information, as well as their link to adverse outcomes, are being developed. A reasonably comprehensive public database of PoT, the Human Toxome Knowledge-base, could become a point of reference for toxicological research and regulatory test strategies.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A major problem in developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) risk assessment is the lack of toxicological hazard information for most compounds. Therefore, new approaches are being considered to provide adequate experimental data that allow regulatory decisions. This process requires a matching of regulatory needs on the one hand and the opportunities provided by new test systems and methods on the other hand. Alignment of academically and industrially driven assay development with regulatory needs in the field of DNT is a core mission of the International STakeholder NETwork (ISTNET) in DNT testing. The first meeting of ISTNET was held in Zurich on 23-24 January 2014 in order to explore the concept of adverse outcome pathway (AOP) to practical DNT testing. AOPs were considered promising tools to promote test systems development according to regulatory needs. Moreover, the AOP concept was identified as an important guiding principle to assemble predictive integrated testing strategies (ITSs) for DNT. The recommendations on a road map towards AOP-based DNT testing is considered a stepwise approach, operating initially with incomplete AOPs for compound grouping, and focussing on key events of neurodevelopment. Next steps to be considered in follow-up activities are the use of case studies to further apply the AOP concept in regulatory DNT testing, making use of AOP intersections (common key events) for economic development of screening assays, and addressing the transition from qualitative descriptions to quantitative network modelling.
    Archive für Toxikologie 01/2015; 89(2). DOI:10.1007/s00204-015-1464-2 · 5.08 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chemical regulation is challenged by the large number of chemicals requiring assessment for potential human health and environmental impacts. Current approaches are too resource intensive in terms of time, money and animal use to evaluate all chemicals under development or already on the market. The need for timely and robust decision making demands that regulatory toxicity testing becomes more cost-effective and efficient. One way to realize this goal is by being more strategic in directing testing resources; focusing on chemicals of highest concern, limiting testing to the most probable hazards, or targeting the most vulnerable species. Hypothesis driven Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) have been proposed as practical solutions to such strategic testing. In parallel, the development of the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework, which provides information on the causal links between a molecular initiating event (MIE), intermediate key events (KEs) and an adverse outcome (AO) of regulatory concern, offers the biological context to facilitate development of IATA for regulatory decision making. This manuscript summarizes discussions at the Workshop entitled "Advancing AOPs for Integrated Toxicology and Regulatory Applications" with particular focus on the role AOPs play in informing the development of IATA for different regulatory purposes.
    Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 09/2014; 70(3). DOI:10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.09.009 · 2.14 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
12 Downloads
Available from
Sep 27, 2014