Literature DB >> 23978460

Dose metric considerations in in vitro assays to improve quantitative in vitro-in vivo dose extrapolations.

Floris A Groothuis1, Minne B Heringa2, Beate Nicol3, Joop L M Hermens4, Bas J Blaauboer5, Nynke I Kramer6.   

Abstract

Challenges to improve toxicological risk assessment to meet the demands of the EU chemical's legislation, REACH, and the EU 7th Amendment of the Cosmetics Directive have accelerated the development of non-animal based methods. Unfortunately, uncertainties remain surrounding the power of alternative methods such as in vitro assays to predict in vivo dose-response relationships, which impedes their use in regulatory toxicology. One issue reviewed here, is the lack of a well-defined dose metric for use in concentration-effect relationships obtained from in vitro cell assays. Traditionally, the nominal concentration has been used to define in vitro concentration-effect relationships. However, chemicals may differentially and non-specifically bind to medium constituents, well plate plastic and cells. They may also evaporate, degrade or be metabolized over the exposure period at different rates. Studies have shown that these processes may reduce the bioavailable and biologically effective dose of test chemicals in in vitro assays to levels far below their nominal concentration. This subsequently hampers the interpretation of in vitro data to predict and compare the true toxic potency of test chemicals. Therefore, this review discusses a number of dose metrics and their dependency on in vitro assay setup. Recommendations are given on when to consider alternative dose metrics instead of nominal concentrations, in order to reduce effect concentration variability between in vitro assays and between in vitro and in vivo assays in toxicology.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Dose; Free concentration; In vitro assay; Mechanism of action; Quantitative in vitro–in vivo extrapolation (QIVIVE)

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23978460     DOI: 10.1016/j.tox.2013.08.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicology        ISSN: 0300-483X            Impact factor:   4.221


  42 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

Review 2.  In vitro to in vivo extrapolation for high throughput prioritization and decision making.

Authors:  Shannon M Bell; Xiaoqing Chang; John F Wambaugh; David G Allen; Mike Bartels; Kim L R Brouwer; Warren M Casey; Neepa Choksi; Stephen S Ferguson; Grazyna Fraczkiewicz; Annie M Jarabek; Alice Ke; Annie Lumen; Scott G Lynn; Alicia Paini; Paul S Price; Caroline Ring; Ted W Simon; Nisha S Sipes; Catherine S Sprankle; Judy Strickland; John Troutman; Barbara A Wetmore; Nicole C Kleinstreuer
Journal:  Toxicol In Vitro       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 3.500

3.  The Next Generation Blueprint of Computational Toxicology at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Authors:  Russell S Thomas; Tina Bahadori; Timothy J Buckley; John Cowden; Chad Deisenroth; Kathie L Dionisio; Jeffrey B Frithsen; Christopher M Grulke; Maureen R Gwinn; Joshua A Harrill; Mark Higuchi; Keith A Houck; Michael F Hughes; E Sidney Hunter; Kristin K Isaacs; Richard S Judson; Thomas B Knudsen; Jason C Lambert; Monica Linnenbrink; Todd M Martin; Seth R Newton; Stephanie Padilla; Grace Patlewicz; Katie Paul-Friedman; Katherine A Phillips; Ann M Richard; Reeder Sams; Timothy J Shafer; R Woodrow Setzer; Imran Shah; Jane E Simmons; Steven O Simmons; Amar Singh; Jon R Sobus; Mark Strynar; Adam Swank; Rogelio Tornero-Valez; Elin M Ulrich; Daniel L Villeneuve; John F Wambaugh; Barbara A Wetmore; Antony J Williams
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 4.849

4.  Evaluating In Vitro-In Vivo Extrapolation of Toxicokinetics.

Authors:  John F Wambaugh; Michael F Hughes; Caroline L Ring; Denise K MacMillan; Jermaine Ford; Timothy R Fennell; Sherry R Black; Rodney W Snyder; Nisha S Sipes; Barbara A Wetmore; Joost Westerhout; R Woodrow Setzer; Robert G Pearce; Jane Ellen Simmons; Russell S Thomas
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 4.849

5.  Assessing Toxicokinetic Uncertainty and Variability in Risk Prioritization.

Authors:  John F Wambaugh; Barbara A Wetmore; Caroline L Ring; Chantel I Nicolas; Robert G Pearce; Gregory S Honda; Roger Dinallo; Derek Angus; Jon Gilbert; Teresa Sierra; Akshay Badrinarayanan; Bradley Snodgrass; Adam Brockman; Chris Strock; R Woodrow Setzer; Russell S Thomas
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 4.849

6.  Phthalate metabolism and kinetics in an in vitro model of testis development.

Authors:  Sean Harris; Susanna Wegner; Sung Woo Hong; Elaine M Faustman
Journal:  Toxicol In Vitro       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 3.500

7.  Towards best use and regulatory acceptance of generic physiologically based kinetic (PBK) models for in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) in chemical risk assessment.

Authors:  Abdulkarim Najjar; Ans Punt; John Wambaugh; Alicia Paini; Corie Ellison; Styliani Fragki; Enrica Bianchi; Fagen Zhang; Joost Westerhout; Dennis Mueller; Hequn Li; Quan Shi; Timothy W Gant; Phil Botham; Rémi Bars; Aldert Piersma; Ben van Ravenzwaay; Nynke I Kramer
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-09-05       Impact factor: 6.168

8.  Summary of 17 chemicals evaluated by OECD TG229 using Japanese Medaka, Oryzias latipes in EXTEND 2016.

Authors:  Yukio Kawashima; Yuta Onishi; Norihisa Tatarazako; Hirotaka Yamamoto; Masaaki Koshio; Tomohiro Oka; Yoshifumi Horie; Haruna Watanabe; Takashi Nakamoto; Jun Yamamoto; Hidenori Ishikawa; Tomomi Sato; Kunihiko Yamazaki; Taisen Iguchi
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2021-11-02       Impact factor: 3.628

9.  Moles of a Substance per Cell Is a Highly Informative Dosing Metric in Cell Culture.

Authors:  Claire M Doskey; Thomas J van 't Erve; Brett A Wagner; Garry R Buettner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  In vitro testing of basal cytotoxicity: Establishment of an adverse outcome pathway from chemical insult to cell death.

Authors:  Mathieu Vinken; Bas J Blaauboer
Journal:  Toxicol In Vitro       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 3.500

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.