Literature DB >> 21770028

Critical evaluation of current developmental toxicity testing strategies: a case of babies and their bathwater.

Edward W Carney1, Amy L Ellis, Rochelle W Tyl, Paul M D Foster, Anthony R Scialli, Kary Thompson, James Kim.   

Abstract

This review is the second in a series of four papers emanating from a workshop entitled "Developmental Toxicology-New Directions," which was sponsored by the ILSI Health and Environmental Sciences Institute's (HESI) Developmental and Reproductive Toxicology Technical Committee. The present review analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of current developmental safety testing approaches in an effort to identify those strengths that should be retained in the future versus the weaknesses that should be eliminated. Workshop participants considered the following to be key strengths of current testing approaches: the integrated biology of pregnant animal models including pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic processes, the ability to detect low incidence malformations as well as maternally mediated toxicity, and the long history of use coupled with extensive historical data. A number of weaknesses were related to the resource-intensive nature of developmental toxicity testing (e.g., large number of animals, high costs, low throughput, the inability to keep pace with the demand for more toxicity data). Other weaknesses included the use of very high dose levels that often far exceed human exposure levels, the confounding influence of maternal toxicity, sparse understanding of basic developmental mechanisms and genetics of standard animal models relative to mouse or lower organisms, difficulties interpreting low incidence findings, and issues surrounding the interpretation of minor skeletal variations. An appreciation of these strengths and weaknesses is critical for the design of new approaches to developmental toxicity testing in the 21st century.
© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21770028     DOI: 10.1002/bdrb.20318

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol        ISSN: 1542-9733


  5 in total

1.  Predicting the future: opportunities and challenges for the chemical industry to apply 21st-century toxicity testing.

Authors:  Raja S Settivari; Nicholas Ball; Lynea Murphy; Reza Rasoulpour; Darrell R Boverhof; Edward W Carney
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.232

Review 2.  Treatment of poor placentation and the prevention of associated adverse outcomes--what does the future hold?

Authors:  R N Spencer; D J Carr; A L David
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 3.  Cord Blood Cells for Developmental Toxicology and Environmental Health.

Authors:  Dora Il'yasova; Noreen Kloc; Alexander Kinev
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2015-12-03

4.  3S - Systematic, systemic, and systems biology and toxicology.

Authors:  Lena Smirnova; Nicole Kleinstreuer; Raffaella Corvi; Andre Levchenko; Suzanne C Fitzpatrick; Thomas Hartung
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 6.043

5.  Optimizing responses to drug safety signals in pregnancy: the example of dolutegravir and neural tube defects.

Authors:  Lynne M Mofenson; Anton L Pozniak; Jacque Wambui; Elliot Raizes; Andrea Ciaranello; Polly Clayden; Peter Ehrenkranz; Ade Fakoya; Andrew Hill; Saye Khoo; Imelda Mahaka; Surbhi Modi; Cynthia Moore; Andrew Phillips; George Siberry; Kenly Sikwese; Claire Thorne; Heather D Watts; Meg Doherty; Nathan P Ford
Journal:  J Int AIDS Soc       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 5.396

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.