Literature DB >> 25462785

Interpreting in vitro developmental toxicity test battery results: The consideration of toxicokinetics.

Sieto Bosgra1, Joost Westerhout2.   

Abstract

In the EU collaborative project ChemScreen an alternative, in vitro assay-based test strategy was developed to screen compounds for reproductive toxicity. A toxicokinetic modeling approach was used to allow quantitative comparison between effective concentrations in the in vitro test battery and observations of developmental toxicity in vivo. This modeling strategy is based on (1) the definition of relevant observations of toxicity in vivo, (2) simulation of the corresponding systemic concentrations in vivo by toxicokinetic modeling, and (3) correction for differences in protein binding and lipid partitioning between plasma and in vitro test media. The test results of a feasibility study with a number of known reproductive toxicants has been described previously (Piersma et al. [15]). In the present paper, we take a more detailed look at the toxicokinetics of these compounds, and add the analysis of some compounds from subsequent studies. We discuss how the consideration of toxicokinetics allowed comparison between test systems with differing test medium composition, has helped to interpret the in vitro findings in light of in vivo observations, and to gain confidence in the predictive value of the test battery outcomes. The same toxicokinetic modeling strategy, in reverse order, can now be used for risk assessment purposes to predict toxic doses in vivo from effective concentrations in vitro.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  In vitro test battery; In vitro–in vivo extrapolation; Protein binding; TK modeling; Toxicokinetics

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25462785     DOI: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2014.11.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Toxicol        ISSN: 0890-6238            Impact factor:   3.143


  3 in total

1.  Supporting read-across using biological data.

Authors:  Hao Zhu; Mounir Bouhifd; Elizabeth Donley; Laura Egnash; Nicole Kleinstreuer; E Dinant Kroese; Zhichao Liu; Thomas Luechtefeld; Jessica Palmer; David Pamies; Jie Shen; Volker Strauss; Shengde Wu; Thomas Hartung
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 6.043

2.  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

3.  Induction of Inflammation In Vivo by Electrocardiogram Sensor Operation Using Wireless Power Transmission.

Authors:  Jin-Chul Heo; Beomjoon Kim; Yoon-Nyun Kim; Dae-Kwang Kim; Jong-Ha Lee
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 3.576

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.