Literature DB >> 34783606

Emerging technologies and their impact on regulatory science.

Elke Anklam1, Martin Iain Bahl2, Robert Ball3, Richard D Beger3, Jonathan Cohen3, Suzanne Fitzpatrick3, Philippe Girard4, Blanka Halamoda-Kenzaoui1, Denise Hinton3, Akihiko Hirose5, Arnd Hoeveler1, Masamitsu Honma5, Marta Hugas6, Seichi Ishida5, George En Kass6, Hajime Kojima5, Ira Krefting3, Serguei Liachenko3, Yan Liu7, Shane Masters3, Uwe Marx8, Timothy McCarthy9, Tim Mercer10, Anil Patri3, Carmen Pelaez11, Munir Pirmohamed12, Stefan Platz13, Alexandre Js Ribeiro3, Joseph V Rodricks14, Ivan Rusyn15, Reza M Salek16, Reinhilde Schoonjans6, Primal Silva17, Clive N Svendsen18, Susan Sumner19, Kyung Sung3, Danilo Tagle20, Li Tong21, Weida Tong3, Janny van den Eijnden-van-Raaij22, Neil Vary17, Tao Wang23, John Waterton24, May Wang21, Hairuo Wen25, David Wishart26, Yinyin Yuan27, William Slikker3.   

Abstract

There is an evolution and increasing need for the utilization of emerging cellular, molecular and in silico technologies and novel approaches for safety assessment of food, drugs, and personal care products. Convergence of these emerging technologies is also enabling rapid advances and approaches that may impact regulatory decisions and approvals. Although the development of emerging technologies may allow rapid advances in regulatory decision making, there is concern that these new technologies have not been thoroughly evaluated to determine if they are ready for regulatory application, singularly or in combinations. The magnitude of these combined technical advances may outpace the ability to assess fit for purpose and to allow routine application of these new methods for regulatory purposes. There is a need to develop strategies to evaluate the new technologies to determine which ones are ready for regulatory use. The opportunity to apply these potentially faster, more accurate, and cost-effective approaches remains an important goal to facilitate their incorporation into regulatory use. However, without a clear strategy to evaluate emerging technologies rapidly and appropriately, the value of these efforts may go unrecognized or may take longer. It is important for the regulatory science field to keep up with the research in these technically advanced areas and to understand the science behind these new approaches. The regulatory field must understand the critical quality attributes of these novel approaches and learn from each other's experience so that workforces can be trained to prepare for emerging global regulatory challenges. Moreover, it is essential that the regulatory community must work with the technology developers to harness collective capabilities towards developing a strategy for evaluation of these new and novel assessment tools.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Emerging technologies; bioimaging; bioinformatics; biomarkers; regulatory science; risk assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34783606      PMCID: PMC8749227          DOI: 10.1177/15353702211052280

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Biol Med (Maywood)        ISSN: 1535-3699


  186 in total

1.  An MRI rating scale for amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema or effusion.

Authors:  F Barkhof; M Daams; P Scheltens; H R Brashear; H M Arrighi; A Bechten; K Morris; M McGovern; M P Wattjes
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 2.  Organ/body-on-a-chip based on microfluidic technology for drug discovery.

Authors:  Hiroshi Kimura; Yasuyuki Sakai; Teruo Fujii
Journal:  Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 3.614

3.  Reliable generation of induced pluripotent stem cells from human lymphoblastoid cell lines.

Authors:  Robert Barrett; Loren Ornelas; Nicole Yeager; Berhan Mandefro; Anais Sahabian; Lindsay Lenaeus; Stephan R Targan; Clive N Svendsen; Dhruv Sareen
Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 6.940

Review 4.  The mouse gut microbiome revisited: From complex diversity to model ecosystems.

Authors:  Thomas Clavel; Ilias Lagkouvardos; Michael Blaut; Bärbel Stecher
Journal:  Int J Med Microbiol       Date:  2016-03-05       Impact factor: 3.473

5.  Analysis of reproducibility and robustness of a human microfluidic four-cell liver acinus microphysiology system (LAMPS).

Authors:  Courtney Sakolish; Celeste E Reese; Yu-Syuan Luo; Alan Valdiviezo; Mark E Schurdak; Albert Gough; D Lansing Taylor; Weihsueh A Chiu; Lawrence A Vernetti; Ivan Rusyn
Journal:  Toxicology       Date:  2020-12-08       Impact factor: 4.221

6.  Human iPSC-Derived Endothelial Cells and Microengineered Organ-Chip Enhance Neuronal Development.

Authors:  Samuel Sances; Ritchie Ho; Gad Vatine; Dylan West; Alex Laperle; Amanda Meyer; Marlesa Godoy; Paul S Kay; Berhan Mandefro; Seigo Hatata; Chris Hinojosa; Norman Wen; Dhruv Sareen; Geraldine A Hamilton; Clive N Svendsen
Journal:  Stem Cell Reports       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 7.765

7.  Implementation of genotype-guided dosing of warfarin with point-of-care genetic testing in three UK clinics: a matched cohort study.

Authors:  Andrea L Jorgensen; Clare Prince; Gail Fitzgerald; Anita Hanson; Jennifer Downing; Julia Reynolds; J Eunice Zhang; Ana Alfirevic; Munir Pirmohamed
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 8.775

Review 8.  Recent advances in human iPSC-derived models of the blood-brain barrier.

Authors:  Michael J Workman; Clive N Svendsen
Journal:  Fluids Barriers CNS       Date:  2020-04-22

9.  Functional Profiling of Chondrogenically Induced Multipotent Stromal Cell Aggregates Reveals Transcriptomic and Emergent Morphological Phenotypes Predictive of Differentiation Capacity.

Authors:  Johnny Lam; Ian H Bellayr; Ross A Marklein; Steven R Bauer; Raj K Puri; Kyung E Sung
Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med       Date:  2018-08-07       Impact factor: 6.940

10.  Technology Transfer of the Microphysiological Systems: A Case Study of the Human Proximal Tubule Tissue Chip.

Authors:  Courtney Sakolish; Elijah J Weber; Edward J Kelly; Jonathan Himmelfarb; Roula Mouneimne; Fabian A Grimm; John S House; Terry Wade; Arum Han; Weihsueh A Chiu; Ivan Rusyn
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-10-05       Impact factor: 4.379

View more
  3 in total

1.  Microphysiological Systems Evaluation: Experience of TEX-VAL Tissue Chip Testing Consortium.

Authors:  Ivan Rusyn; Courtney Sakolish; Yuki Kato; Clifford Stephan; Leoncio Vergara; Philip Hewitt; Vasanthi Bhaskaran; Myrtle Davis; Rhiannon N Hardwick; Stephen S Ferguson; Jason P Stanko; Piyush Bajaj; Karissa Adkins; Nisha S Sipes; E Sidney Hunter; Maria T Baltazar; Paul L Carmichael; Kritika Sadh; Richard A Becker
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 4.109

Review 2.  Artificial Intelligence-Based Pharmacovigilance in the Setting of Limited Resources.

Authors:  Likeng Liang; Jifa Hu; Gang Sun; Na Hong; Ge Wu; Yuejun He; Yong Li; Tianyong Hao; Li Liu; Mengchun Gong
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 5.228

3.  Challenges and opportunities for mining adverse drug reactions: perspectives from pharma, regulatory agencies, healthcare providers and consumers.

Authors:  Graciela Gonzalez-Hernandez; Martin Krallinger; Monica Muñoz; Raul Rodriguez-Esteban; Özlem Uzuner; Lynette Hirschman
Journal:  Database (Oxford)       Date:  2022-09-02       Impact factor: 4.462

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.