Literature DB >> 32562760

Replacing the refinement for skin sensitization testing: Considerations to the implementation of adverse outcome pathway (AOP)-based defined approaches (DA) in OECD guidelines.

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.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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


  5 in total

1.  Weight of Evidence Approach for Skin Sensitization Potency Categorization of Fragrance Ingredients.

Authors:  Mihwa Na; Devin O'Brien; Maura Lavelle; Isabelle Lee; G Frank Gerberick; Anne Marie Api
Journal:  Dermatitis       Date:  2022 Mar-Apr 01       Impact factor: 4.867

Review 2.  Polymer Composite-Based Materials with Photocatalytic Applications in Wastewater Organic Pollutant Removal: A Mini Review.

Authors:  Alexandru Enesca; Cristina Cazan
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 4.967

3.  Accounting for Precision Uncertainty of Toxicity Testing: Methods to Define Borderline Ranges and Implications for Hazard Assessment of Chemicals.

Authors:  Silke Gabbert; Miriam Mathea; Susanne N Kolle; Robert Landsiedel
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 4.302

4.  A framework for chemical safety assessment incorporating new approach methodologies within REACH.

Authors:  Nicholas Ball; Remi Bars; Philip A Botham; Andreea Cuciureanu; Mark T D Cronin; John E Doe; Tatsiana Dudzina; Timothy W Gant; Marcel Leist; Bennard van Ravenzwaay
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 5.153

5.  Chemical Composition and Effect against Skin Alterations of Bioactive Extracts Obtained by the Hydrodistillation of Eucalyptus globulus Leaves.

Authors:  Patrícia Moreira; Fábio Jesus Sousa; Patrícia Matos; Gonçalo Sousa Brites; Maria José Gonçalves; Carlos Cavaleiro; Artur Figueirinha; Lígia Salgueiro; Maria Teresa Batista; Pedro Costa Branco; Maria Teresa Cruz; Cláudia Fragão Pereira
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 6.321

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.