"In response to increased concerns about neurotoxicity induced in humans by exposure to chemicals during development , the scientific community is developing alternatives that will reduce the use of traditional laboratory animals while addressing the demand for increased and more relevant testing . In addition, more than 30,000 chemicals without adequate toxicological information are estimated to be in use in the United States and Europe (Schmidt, 2009), and the task of testing thousands of chemicals systematically with classical animal tests exceeds our present capabilities. In 2008, in response to the US National Academy Q5 of Sciences' report on " Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century " (NRC, 2007), a collaboration was established between the National Institute of Environmental Health "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Carcinogenicity and mutagenicity are toxicological end points posing considerable concern for human health. Due to the cost in animal lives, time and money, alternative approaches to the rodent bioassay were designed based on: i) identification of mutations and ii) structure-activity relationships.
Evidence on i) and ii) is summarized, covering 4 decades (1971 - 2010).
A comprehensive, state-of-the-art perspective on alternatives to the carcinogenicity bioassay.
Research to develop mutagenicity-based tests to predict carcinogenicity has generated useful results only for a limited area of the chemical space, that is, for the DNA-reactive chemicals (able to induce cancer, together with a wide spectrum of mutations). The most predictive mutagenicity-based assay is the Ames test. For non-DNA-reactive chemicals, that are Ames-negative and mutagenic in other in vitro assays (e.g., clastogenicity), no correlation with carcinogenicity is apparent. The knowledge on DNA reactivity permits the identification of genotoxic carcinogens with the same efficiency of the Ames test. Thus, a chemical mutagenic in Salmonella and/or with structural alerts should be seriously considered as a potential carcinogen. No reliable mutagenicity-based alternative tools are available to assess the risk of non-DNA-reactive chemicals.
Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism & Toxicology 07/2010; 6(7):809-19. DOI:10.1517/17425255.2010.486400 · 2.83 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The research on alternative toxicological methods provides, among other things, a privileged viewpoint on one of the central issues of modern biomedical research--the relationship between (a) biological phenomena observed at the level of tissues and organisms and (b) their cellular and molecular bases as studied in isolated systems in vitro. The newly released ToxCast Phase 1 results, subject to initial analysis, converge with evidence from other fields (e.g., research on drug design with intensive use of omics technologies, traditional research on alternative tests) in indicating a low degree of the in vitro/in vivo correlation overall. In addition, this and other approaches point to the need for combining biological and chemical information in exploring the in vitro to in vivo connection.
Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part C Environmental Carcinogenesis & Ecotoxicology Reviews 10/2010; 28(4):272-86. DOI:10.1080/10590501.2010.525781 · 3.56 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.