Literature DB >> 33555348

FutureTox IV Workshop Summary: Predictive Toxicology for Healthy Children.

Thomas B Knudsen1, Suzanne Compton Fitzpatrick2, K Nadira De Abrew3, Linda S Birnbaum4, Anne Chappelle5, George P Daston3, Dana C Dolinoy6, Alison Elder7, Susan Euling8, Elaine M Faustman9, Kristi Pullen Fedinick10, Jill A Franzosa1, Derik E Haggard1,11, Laurie Haws12, Nicole C Kleinstreuer13, Germaine M Buck Louis14, Donna L Mendrick15, Ruthann Rudel16, Katerine S Saili1, Thaddeus T Schug4, Robyn L Tanguay17, Alexandra E Turley2, Barbara A Wetmore1, Kimberly W White18, Todd J Zurlinden1.   

Abstract

FutureTox IV, a Society of Toxicology Contemporary Concepts in Toxicology workshop, was held in November 2018. Building upon FutureTox I, II, and III, this conference focused on the latest science and technology for in vitro profiling and in silico modeling as it relates to predictive developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART). Publicly available high-throughput screening data sets are now available for broad in vitro profiling of bioactivities across large inventories of chemicals. Coupling this vast amount of mechanistic data with a deeper understanding of molecular embryology and post-natal development lays the groundwork for using new approach methodologies (NAMs) to evaluate chemical toxicity, drug efficacy, and safety assessment for embryo-fetal development. NAM is a term recently adopted in reference to any technology, methodology, approach, or combination thereof that can be used to provide information on chemical hazard and risk assessment to avoid the use of intact animals (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], Strategic plan to promote the development and implementation of alternative test methods within the tsca program, 2018, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-06/documents/epa_alt_strat_plan_6-20-18_clean_final.pdf). There are challenges to implementing NAMs to evaluate chemicals for developmental toxicity compared with adult toxicity. This forum article reviews the 2018 workshop activities, highlighting challenges and opportunities for applying NAMs for adverse pregnancy outcomes (eg, preterm labor, malformations, low birth weight) as well as disorders manifesting postnatally (eg, neurodevelopmental impairment, breast cancer, cardiovascular disease, fertility). DART is an important concern for different regulatory statutes and test guidelines. Leveraging advancements in such approaches and the accompanying efficiencies to detecting potential hazards to human development are the unifying concepts toward implementing NAMs in DART testing. Although use of NAMs for higher level regulatory decision making is still on the horizon, the conference highlighted novel testing platforms and computational models that cover multiple levels of biological organization, with the unique temporal dynamics of embryonic development, and novel approaches for estimating toxicokinetic parameters essential in supporting in vitro to in vivo extrapolation. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Toxicology 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  zzm321990 in silico modeling; children’s environmental health; developmental and reproductive toxicity testing; high-throughput screening; in vitro profiling; new approach methodologies (NAMs); pediatric health

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33555348      PMCID: PMC8041457          DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfab013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Sci        ISSN: 1096-0929            Impact factor:   4.849


  74 in total

1.  Somites without a clock.

Authors:  Ana S Dias; Irene de Almeida; Julio M Belmonte; James A Glazier; Claudio D Stern
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Applying Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) to support Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA).

Authors:  Knut Erik Tollefsen; Stefan Scholz; Mark T Cronin; Stephen W Edwards; Joop de Knecht; Kevin Crofton; Natalia Garcia-Reyero; Thomas Hartung; Andrew Worth; Grace Patlewicz
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2014-09-27       Impact factor: 3.271

3.  Protective Effects of Xenon on Propofol-Induced Neurotoxicity in Human Neural Stem Cell-Derived Models.

Authors:  Fang Liu; Shuliang Liu; Tucker A Patterson; Charles Fogle; Joseph P Hanig; Cheng Wang; William Slikker
Journal:  Mol Neurobiol       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 5.590

Review 4.  Advancing Computational Toxicology in the Big Data Era by Artificial Intelligence: Data-Driven and Mechanism-Driven Modeling for Chemical Toxicity.

Authors:  Heather L Ciallella; Hao Zhu
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 3.739

5.  Omnisphero: a high-content image analysis (HCA) approach for phenotypic developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) screenings of organoid neurosphere cultures in vitro.

Authors:  Martin R Schmuck; Thomas Temme; Katharina Dach; Denise de Boer; Marta Barenys; Farina Bendt; Axel Mosig; Ellen Fritsche
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2016-10-08       Impact factor: 5.153

6.  Computational modeling and simulation of genital tubercle development.

Authors:  Maxwell C K Leung; M Shane Hutson; Ashley W Seifert; Richard M Spencer; Thomas B Knudsen
Journal:  Reprod Toxicol       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 3.143

Review 7.  Environmental influences on reproductive health: the importance of chemical exposures.

Authors:  Aolin Wang; Amy Padula; Marina Sirota; Tracey J Woodruff
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  International STakeholder NETwork (ISTNET): creating a developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) testing road map for regulatory purposes.

Authors:  Anna Bal-Price; Kevin M Crofton; Marcel Leist; Sandra Allen; Michael Arand; Timo Buetler; Nathalie Delrue; Rex E FitzGerald; Thomas Hartung; Tuula Heinonen; Helena Hogberg; Susanne Hougaard Bennekou; Walter Lichtensteiger; Daniela Oggier; Martin Paparella; Marta Axelstad; Aldert Piersma; Eva Rached; Benoît Schilter; Gabriele Schmuck; Luc Stoppini; Enrico Tongiorgi; Manuela Tiramani; Florianne Monnet-Tschudi; Martin F Wilks; Timo Ylikomi; Ellen Fritsche
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2015-01-25       Impact factor: 5.153

9.  The Memory of Environmental Chemical Exposure in C. elegans Is Dependent on the Jumonji Demethylases jmjd-2 and jmjd-3/utx-1.

Authors:  Jessica Camacho; Lisa Truong; Zeyneb Kurt; Yen-Wei Chen; Marco Morselli; Gerardo Gutierrez; Matteo Pellegrini; Xia Yang; Patrick Allard
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 9.423

10.  A Suspect Screening Method for Characterizing Multiple Chemical Exposures among a Demographically Diverse Population of Pregnant Women in San Francisco.

Authors:  Aolin Wang; Roy R Gerona; Jackie M Schwartz; Thomas Lin; Marina Sirota; Rachel Morello-Frosch; Tracey J Woodruff
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 9.031

View more
  2 in total

1.  Pluripotent stem cell assays: Modalities and applications for predictive developmental toxicity.

Authors:  Aldert H Piersma; Nancy C Baker; George P Daston; Burkhard Flick; Michio Fujiwara; Thomas B Knudsen; Horst Spielmann; Noriyuki Suzuki; Katya Tsaioun; Hajime Kojima
Journal:  Curr Res Toxicol       Date:  2022-05-13

2.  Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Implementation: How the Amended Law Has Failed to Protect Vulnerable Populations from Toxic Chemicals in the United States.

Authors:  Swati D G Rayasam; Patricia D Koman; Daniel A Axelrad; Tracey J Woodruff; Nicholas Chartres
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2022-08-18       Impact factor: 11.357

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.