Literature DB >> 28105478

The need for strategic development of safety sciences.

Francois Busquet1, Thomas Hartung1,2.   

Abstract

The practice of risk assessment and regulation of substances has largely developed as a patchwork of circumstantial additions to a nowadays more or less shared international toolbox. The dominant drivers from the US and Europe have pursued remarkably different approaches in the use of these tools for regulation, i.e., a more risk-based approach in the US and a more precautionary approach in Europe. We argue that there is need for scientific developments not only for the tools but also for their application, i.e., a need for Regulatory Science or, perhaps better, Safety Science. While some of this is emerging on the US side as strategic reports, e.g., from the National Academies, the NIH and the regulatory agencies, especially the EPA and the FDA, such strategic developments beyond technological developments are largely lacking in Europe or have started only recently at EFSA, ECHA or within the flagship project EU-ToxRisk. This article provides a rationale for the creation of a European Safety Sciences Institute (ESSI) based on regulatory and scientific needs, political context and current EU missions. Moreover, the possible modus operandi of ESSI will be described along with possible working formats as well as anticipated main tasks and duties. This mirrors the triple alliance on the American side (US EPA, NIH and FDA) in revamping regulatory sciences. Moreover, this could fit the political agenda of the European Commission for better implementation of existing EU legislation rather than creating new laws.

Keywords:  alternative test methods; regulatory toxicology; scientific policy advice; testing strategies

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28105478     DOI: 10.14573/altex.1701031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  ALTEX        ISSN: 1868-596X            Impact factor:   6.043


  5 in total

Review 1.  Big-data and machine learning to revamp computational toxicology and its use in risk assessment.

Authors:  Thomas Luechtefeld; Craig Rowlands; Thomas Hartung
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 3.524

2.  Systems Toxicology: Real World Applications and Opportunities.

Authors:  Thomas Hartung; Rex E FitzGerald; Paul Jennings; Gary R Mirams; Manuel C Peitsch; Amin Rostami-Hodjegan; Imran Shah; Martin F Wilks; Shana J Sturla
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 3.739

3.  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

4.  Computational approaches to chemical hazard assessment.

Authors:  Thomas Luechtefeld; Thomas Hartung
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 6.043

5.  Machine Learning of Toxicological Big Data Enables Read-Across Structure Activity Relationships (RASAR) Outperforming Animal Test Reproducibility.

Authors:  Thomas Luechtefeld; Dan Marsh; Craig Rowlands; Thomas Hartung
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 4.849

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.