Literature DB >> 23291301

Use and validation of HT/HC assays to support 21st century toxicity evaluations.

Grace Patlewicz1, Ted Simon, Katy Goyak, Richard D Phillips, J Craig Rowlands, Shawn D Seidel, Richard A Becker.   

Abstract

Advances in high throughput and high content (HT/HC) methods such as those used in the fields of toxicogenomics, bioinformatics, and computational toxicology have the potential to improve both the efficiency and effectiveness of toxicity evaluations and risk assessments. However, prior to use, scientific confidence in these methods should be formally established. Traditional validation approaches that define relevance, reliability, sensitivity and specificity may not be readily applicable. HT/HC methods are not exact replacements for in vivo testing, and although run individually, these assays are likely to be used as a group or battery for decision making and use robotics, which may be unique in each laboratory setting. Building on the frameworks developed in the 2010 Institute of Medicine Report on Biomarkers and the OECD 2007 Report on (Q)SAR Validation, we present constructs that can be adapted to address the validation challenges of HT/HC methods. These are flexible, transparent, and require explicit specification of context and purpose of use such that scientific confidence (validation) can be defined to meet different regulatory applications. Using these constructs, we discuss how anchoring the assays and their prediction models to Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) could facilitate the interpretation of results and support scientifically defensible fit-for-purpose applications.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23291301     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2012.12.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  11 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.  From the exposome to mechanistic understanding of chemical-induced adverse effects.

Authors:  Beate I Escher; Jörg Hackermüller; Tobias Polte; Stefan Scholz; Achim Aigner; Rolf Altenburger; Alexander Böhme; Stephanie K Bopp; Werner Brack; Wibke Busch; Marc Chadeau-Hyam; Adrian Covaci; Adolf Eisenträger; James J Galligan; Natalia Garcia-Reyero; Thomas Hartung; Michaela Hein; Gunda Herberth; Annika Jahnke; Jos Kleinjans; Nils Klüver; Martin Krauss; Marja Lamoree; Irina Lehmann; Till Luckenbach; Gary W Miller; Andrea Müller; David H Phillips; Thorsten Reemtsma; Ulrike Rolle-Kampczyk; Gerrit Schüürmann; Benno Schwikowski; Yu-Mei Tan; Saskia Trump; Susanne Walter-Rohde; John F Wambaugh
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2016-12-08       Impact factor: 9.621

3.  Variability in in vivo studies: Defining the upper limit of performance for predictions of systemic effect levels.

Authors:  Ly Ly Pham; Sean Watford; Prachi Pradeep; Matthew T Martin; Russell Thomas; Richard Judson; R Woodrow Setzer; Katie Paul Friedman
Journal:  Comput Toxicol       Date:  2020-08-01

4.  A human liver microphysiology platform for investigating physiology, drug safety, and disease models.

Authors:  Lawrence A Vernetti; Nina Senutovitch; Robert Boltz; Richard DeBiasio; Tong Ying Shun; Albert Gough; D Lansing Taylor
Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)       Date:  2015-07-22

Review 5.  A shift in paradigm towards human biology-based systems for cholestatic-liver diseases.

Authors:  Fozia Noor
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 5.182

6.  A model for aryl hydrocarbon receptor-activated gene expression shows potency and efficacy changes and predicts squelching due to competition for transcription co-activators.

Authors:  Ted W Simon; Robert A Budinsky; J Craig Rowlands
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  A chemical-biological similarity-based grouping of complex substances as a prototype approach for evaluating chemical alternatives.

Authors:  Fabian A Grimm; Yasuhiro Iwata; Oksana Sirenko; Grace A Chappell; Fred A Wright; David M Reif; John Braisted; David L Gerhold; Joanne M Yeakley; Peter Shepard; Bruce Seligmann; Tim Roy; Peter J Boogaard; Hans B Ketelslegers; Arlean M Rohde; Ivan Rusyn
Journal:  Green Chem       Date:  2016-05-16       Impact factor: 10.182

8.  Development of a prioritization method for chemical-mediated effects on steroidogenesis using an integrated statistical analysis of high-throughput H295R data.

Authors:  Derik E Haggard; R Woodrow Setzer; Richard S Judson; Katie Paul Friedman
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2019-10-29       Impact factor: 3.271

9.  Insights and perspectives on emerging inputs to weight of evidence determinations for food safety: workshop proceedings.

Authors:  Heidi Bialk; Craig Llewellyn; Alison Kretser; Richard Canady; Richard Lane; Jeffrey Barach
Journal:  Int J Toxicol       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.032

10.  Application of the TGx-28.65 transcriptomic biomarker to classify genotoxic and non-genotoxic chemicals in human TK6 cells in the presence of rat liver S9.

Authors:  Carole L Yauk; Julie K Buick; Andrew Williams; Carol D Swartz; Leslie Recio; Heng-Hong Li; Albert J Fornace; Errol M Thomson; Jiri Aubrecht
Journal:  Environ Mol Mutagen       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 3.216

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.