| Literature DB >> 32562760 |
Susanne N Kolle1, Robert Landsiedel2, Andreas Natsch3.
Abstract
While single non-animal methods have been adopted in OECD test guidelines, combinations of methods (so called defined approaches, DA) are not. Hardly any animal study can be replaced by a single non-animal method, rather DA are needed. The OECD published the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) on skin sensitization in 2012 and is currently discussing the implementation of DA into a guideline. Obviously, it takes thorough considerations and evaluations to validate such DA. Currently we see four preconditions for a proper and expedient implementation of DA in a guideline: (i) The reference data should be selected to allow meaningful evaluations and must not replicate the limitations of the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) (ii) Methods and prediction models should be validated before they are used in an OECD-adopted DA, (iii) An OECD-adopted DA should follow the respective AOP and (iv) acknowledge regulatory needs and successful toxicological practice. These points still need to be considered in the current discussion at the OECD. A guideline for skin sensitization DA is setting the scene for regulatory acceptance of all new approaches (for any toxicological endpoint) in the future. In this commentary, we are expounding these preconditions to allow a scientifically valid and sustainable application of modern (no-animal) approaches in regulatory toxicology.Entities:
Keywords: Adverse outcome pathway(AOP); Defined approach (DA); Integrated Approach for Testing and Assessment (IATA); Non-animal methods; OECD test guideline; Skin sensitization; Validation
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32562760 DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104713
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ISSN: 0273-2300 Impact factor: 3.271