Literature DB >> 23178337

Selection of test methods to be included in a testing strategy to predict acute oral toxicity: an approach based on statistical analysis of data collected in phase 1 of the ACuteTox project.

A Kinsner-Ovaskainen1, P Prieto, S Stanzel, A Kopp-Schneider.   

Abstract

More than 50 different in vitro and in silico methods assessing specific organ- and system-toxicity, such as haemato-, neuro-, nephro- and hepatotoxicity, as well as intestinal absorption, distribution and metabolism, have been used in the first phase of the ACuteTox project to test a common set of 57 chemicals. This paper describes the methods used for statistical evaluation of concentration-response data collected for each of the endpoint assays, and for the development of a testing strategy applicable for acute toxicity classification of chemicals based on the achieved results of the concentration-response analysis. A final list of in vitro test methods considered to be promising candidates for building blocks of the testing strategy is presented. Only these selected test methods were further investigated in the prevalidation phase of the project. The test methods were chosen according to their reproducibility and reliability and most importantly, according to their potential to classify chemicals into the official acute oral toxicity categories of the EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging (CLP) Regulation. The potential of the test methods to correctly classify the chemicals was assessed by Classification and Regression Trees (CART) analysis.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23178337     DOI: 10.1016/j.tiv.2012.11.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol In Vitro        ISSN: 0887-2333            Impact factor:   3.500


  8 in total

Review 1.  Alternative approaches for identifying acute systemic toxicity: Moving from research to regulatory testing.

Authors:  Jon Hamm; Kristie Sullivan; Amy J Clippinger; Judy Strickland; Shannon Bell; Barun Bhhatarai; Bas Blaauboer; Warren Casey; David Dorman; Anna Forsby; Natàlia Garcia-Reyero; Sean Gehen; Rabea Graepel; Jon Hotchkiss; Anna Lowit; Joanna Matheson; Elissa Reaves; Louis Scarano; Catherine Sprankle; Jay Tunkel; Dan Wilson; Menghang Xia; Hao Zhu; David Allen
Journal:  Toxicol In Vitro       Date:  2017-01-06       Impact factor: 3.500

2.  Development of a neurotoxicity assay that is tuned to detect mitochondrial toxicants.

Authors:  Johannes Delp; Melina Funke; Franziska Rudolf; Andrea Cediel; Susanne Hougaard Bennekou; Wanda van der Stel; Giada Carta; Paul Jennings; Cosimo Toma; Iain Gardner; Bob van de Water; Anna Forsby; Marcel Leist
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2019-06-12       Impact factor: 5.153

Review 3.  In Silico Models for Predicting Acute Systemic Toxicity.

Authors:  Ivanka Tsakovska; Antonia Diukendjieva; Andrew P Worth
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

4.  The EU-ToxRisk method documentation, data processing and chemical testing pipeline for the regulatory use of new approach methods.

Authors:  Alice Krebs; Barbara M A van Vugt-Lussenburg; Tanja Waldmann; Wiebke Albrecht; Jan Boei; Bas Ter Braak; Maja Brajnik; Thomas Braunbeck; Tim Brecklinghaus; Francois Busquet; Andras Dinnyes; Joh Dokler; Xenia Dolde; Thomas E Exner; Ciarán Fisher; David Fluri; Anna Forsby; Jan G Hengstler; Anna-Katharina Holzer; Zofia Janstova; Paul Jennings; Jaffar Kisitu; Julianna Kobolak; Manoj Kumar; Alice Limonciel; Jessica Lundqvist; Balázs Mihalik; Wolfgang Moritz; Giorgia Pallocca; Andrea Paola Cediel Ulloa; Manuel Pastor; Costanza Rovida; Ugis Sarkans; Johannes P Schimming; Bela Z Schmidt; Regina Stöber; Tobias Strassfeld; Bob van de Water; Anja Wilmes; Bart van der Burg; Catherine M Verfaillie; Rebecca von Hellfeld; Harry Vrieling; Nanette G Vrijenhoek; Marcel Leist
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 5.153

5.  The use of Bayesian methodology in the development and validation of a tiered assessment approach towards prediction of rat acute oral toxicity.

Authors:  James W Firman; Mark T D Cronin; Philip H Rowe; Elizaveta Semenova; John E Doe
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-01-16       Impact factor: 5.153

6.  Mapping Mechanistic Pathways of Acute Oral Systemic Toxicity Using Chemical Structure and Bioactivity Measurements.

Authors:  Stephen W Edwards; Mark Nelms; Virginia K Hench; Jessica Ponder; Kristie Sullivan
Journal:  Front Toxicol       Date:  2022-03-07

Review 7.  Big data in chemical toxicity research: the use of high-throughput screening assays to identify potential toxicants.

Authors:  Hao Zhu; Jun Zhang; Marlene T Kim; Abena Boison; Alexander Sedykh; Kimberlee Moran
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 3.739

8.  Use of LUCS (Light-Up Cell System) as an alternative live cell method to predict human acute oral toxicity.

Authors:  C Gironde; C Dufour; C Furger
Journal:  Toxicol Rep       Date:  2020-02-19
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.