Literature DB >> 29604238

Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment.

Silvia Casati1.   

Abstract

The concept of Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) has been advanced by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries to enable a progressive shift from traditional chemical assessments largely based on the observation of the adverse effect in animal models, using individual methods or predefined batteries of standard toxicity tests, to assessment strategies integrating diverse lines of evidence. The flexible nature of IATA allows the inclusion of mechanistic data generated with non-animal methods and with new technologies (e.g. high-throughput and high content methods). The assessment process within IATA is typically conducted through weight-of-evidence which inevitably includes the elements of subjective expert judgement. For these reasons, IATA cannot be fully harmonized across sectors and countries. Nevertheless, some of the IATA components, such as defined approaches, which consist of a fixed data interpretation procedure (DIP) applied to data generated with a defined set of information sources, can be harmonized. The focus of this MiniReview is to provide an illustration of the differences between the IATA developed so far in the areas of regulatory toxicology, and ongoing activities related to the international harmonization of defined approaches that rely on multiple non-animal information sources.
© 2018 The Author. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Nordic Association for the Publication of BCPT (former Nordic Pharmacological Society).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29604238     DOI: 10.1111/bcpt.13018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol        ISSN: 1742-7835            Impact factor:   4.080


  4 in total

Review 1.  Toxicity testing is evolving!

Authors:  Ida Fischer; Catherine Milton; Heather Wallace
Journal:  Toxicol Res (Camb)       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 3.524

Review 2.  Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail.

Authors:  Pandora Pound; Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 5.531

3.  Application of evidence-based methods to construct mechanism-driven chemical assessment frameworks.

Authors:  Sebastian Hoffmann; Elisa Aiassa; Michelle Angrish; Claire Beausoleil; Frederic Y Bois; Laura Ciccolallo; Peter S Craig; Rob B M De Vries; Jean Lou C M Dorne; Ingrid L Druwe; Stephen W Edwards; Chantra Eskes; Marios Georgiadis; Thomas Hartung; Aude Kienzler; Elisabeth A Kristjansson; Juleen Lam; Laura Martino; Bette Meek; Rebecca L Morgan; Irene Munoz-Guajardo; Pamela D Noyes; Elena Parmelli; Aldert Piersma; Andrew Rooney; Emily Sena; Kristie Sullivan; José Tarazona; Andrea Terron; Kris Thayer; Jan Turner; Jos Verbeek; Didier Verloo; Mathieu Vinken; Sean Watford; Paul Whaley; Daniele Wikoff; Kate Willett; Katya Tsaioun
Journal:  ALTEX       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 6.250

4.  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

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.