Derivation of metabolic point of departure using high-throughput in vitro metabolomics: investigating the importance of sampling time points on benchmark concentration values in the HepaRG cell line.

Amongst omics technologies, metabolomics should have particular value in regulatory toxicology as the measurement of the molecular phenotype is the closest to traditional apical endpoints, whilst offering mechanistic insights into the biological perturbations. Despite this, the application of untargeted metabolomics for point-of-departure (POD) derivation via benchmark concentration (BMC) modelling is still a relatively unexplored area. In this study, a high-throughput workflow was applied to derive PODs associated with a chemical exposure by measuring the intracellular metabolome of the HepaRG cell line following treatment with one of four chemicals (aflatoxin B1, benzo[a]pyrene, cyclosporin A, or rotenone), each at seven concentrations (aflatoxin B1, benzo[a]pyrene, cyclosporin A: from 0.2048 µM to 50 µM; rotenone: from 0.04096 to 10 µM) and five sampling time points (2, 6, 12, 24 and 48 h). The study explored three approaches to derive PODs using benchmark concentration modelling applied to single features in the metabolomics datasets or annotated metabolites or lipids: (1) the 1st rank-ordered unannotated feature, (2) the 1st rank-ordered putatively annotated feature (using a recently developed HepaRG-specific library of polar metabolites and lipids), and (3) 25th rank-ordered feature, demonstrating that for three out of four chemical datasets all of these approaches led to relatively consistent BMC values, varying less than tenfold across the methods. In addition, using the 1st rank-ordered unannotated feature it was possible to investigate temporal trends in the datasets, which were shown to be chemical specific. Furthermore, a possible integration of metabolomics-driven POD derivation with the liver steatosis adverse outcome pathway (AOP) was demonstrated. The study highlights that advances in technologies enable application of in vitro metabolomics at scale; however, greater confidence in metabolite identification is required to ensure PODs are mechanistically anchored.

Artificial intelligence and real-world data for drug and food safety - A regulatory science perspective.

In 2013, the Global Coalition for Regulatory Science Research (GCRSR) was established with members from over ten countries (www.gcrsr.net). One of the main objectives of GCRSR is to facilitate communication among global regulators on the rise of new technologies with regulatory applications through the annual conference Global Summit on Regulatory Science (GSRS). The 11th annual GSRS conference (GSRS21) focused on "Regulatory Sciences for Food/Drug Safety with Real-World Data (RWD) and Artificial Intelligence (AI)." The conference discussed current advancements in both AI and RWD approaches with a specific emphasis on how they impact regulatory sciences and how regulatory agencies across the globe are pursuing the adaptation and oversight of these technologies. There were presentations from Brazil, Canada, India, Italy, Japan, Germany, Switzerland, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States. These presentations highlighted how various agencies are moving forward with these technologies by either improving the agencies' operation and/or preparing regulatory mechanisms to approve the products containing these innovations. To increase the content and discussion, the GSRS21 hosted two debate sessions on the question of "Is Regulatory Science Ready for AI?" and a workshop to showcase the analytical data tools that global regulatory agencies have been using and/or plan to apply to regulatory science. Several key topics were highlighted and discussed during the conference, such as the capabilities of AI and RWD to assist regulatory science policies for drug and food safety, the readiness of AI and data science to provide solutions for regulatory science. Discussions highlighted the need for a constant effort to evaluate emerging technologies for fit-for-purpose regulatory applications. The annual GSRS conferences offer a unique platform to facilitate discussion and collaboration across regulatory agencies, modernizing regulatory approaches, and harmonizing efforts.

Gauging innovation and health impact from biomedical research: survey results and interviews with recipients of EU-funding in the fields of Alzheimer's disease, breast cancer and prostate cancer.

Biomedical research on Alzheimer's disease (AD), breast cancer (BC) and prostate cancer (PC) has globally improved our understanding of the etiopathological mechanisms underlying the onset of these diseases, often with the goal to identify associated genetic and environmental risk factors and develop new medicines. However, the prevalence of these diseases and failure rate in drug development remain high. Being able to retrospectively monitor the major scientific breakthroughs and impact of such investment endeavors is important to re-address funding strategies if and when needed. The EU has supported research into those diseases via its successive framework programmes for research, technological development and innovation. The European Commission (EC) has already undertaken several activities to monitor research impact. As an additional contribution, the EC Joint Research Centre (JRC) launched in 2020 a survey addressed to former and current participants of EU-funded research projects in the fields of AD, BC and PC, with the aim to understand how EU-funded research has contributed to scientific innovation and societal impact, and how the selection of the experimental models may have underpinned the advances made. Further feedback was also gathered through in-depth interviews with some selected survey participants representative of the diverse pre-clinical models used in the EU-funded projects. A comprehensive analysis of survey replies, complemented with the information derived from the interviews, has recently been published in a Synopsis report. Here we discuss the main findings of this analysis and propose a set of priority actions that could be considered to help improving the translation of scientific innovation of biomedical research into societal impact.

Integrating in vitro metabolomics with a 96-well high-throughput screening platform.

INTRODUCTION: High-throughput screening (HTS) is emerging as an approach to support decision-making in chemical safety assessments. In parallel, in vitro metabolomics is a promising approach that can help accelerate the transition from animal models to high-throughput cell-based models in toxicity testing. OBJECTIVE: In this study we establish and evaluate a high-throughput metabolomics workflow that is compatible with a 96-well HTS platform employing 50,000 hepatocytes of HepaRG per well. METHODS: Low biomass cell samples were extracted for metabolomics analyses using a newly established semi-automated protocol, and the intracellular metabolites were analysed using a high-resolution spectral-stitching nanoelectrospray direct infusion mass spectrometry (nESI-DIMS) method that was modified for low sample biomass. RESULTS: The method was assessed with respect to sensitivity and repeatability of the entire workflow from cell culturing and sampling to measurement of the metabolic phenotype, demonstrating sufficient sensitivity (> 3000 features in hepatocyte extracts) and intra- and inter-plate repeatability for polar nESI-DIMS assays (median relative standard deviation < 30%). The assays were employed for a proof-of-principle toxicological study with a model toxicant, cadmium chloride, revealing changes in the metabolome across five sampling times in the 48-h exposure period. To allow the option for lipidomics analyses, the solvent system was extended by establishing separate extraction methods for polar metabolites and lipids. CONCLUSIONS: Experimental, analytical and informatics workflows reported here met pre-defined criteria in terms of sensitivity, repeatability and ability to detect metabolome changes induced by a toxicant and are ready for application in metabolomics-driven toxicity testing to complement HTS assays.

Extension of the Virtual Cell Based Assay from a 2-D to a 3-D Cell Culture Model.

Prediction of chemical toxicity is very useful in risk assessment. With the current paradigm shift towards the use of in vitro and in silico systems, we present herein a theoretical mathematical description of a quasi-diffusion process to predict chemical concentrations in 3-D spheroid cell cultures. By extending a 2-D Virtual Cell Based Assay (VCBA) model into a 3-D spheroid cell model, we assume that cells are arranged in a series of concentric layers within the sphere. We formulate the chemical quasi-diffusion process by simplifying the spheroid with respect to the number of cells in each layer. The system was calibrated and tested with acetaminophen (APAP). Simulated predictions of APAP toxicity were compared with empirical data from in vitro measurements by using a 3-D spheroid model. The results of this first attempt to extend the VCBA model are promising - they show that the VCBA model simulates close correlation between the influence of compound concentration and the viability of the HepaRG 3-D cell culture. The 3-D VCBA model provides a complement to current in vitro procedures to refine experimental setups, to fill data gaps and help in the interpretation of in vitro data for the purposes of risk assessment.

Progress towards an OECD reporting framework for transcriptomics and metabolomics in regulatory toxicology.

Omics methodologies are widely used in toxicological research to understand modes and mechanisms of toxicity. Increasingly, these methodologies are being applied to questions of regulatory interest such as molecular point-of-departure derivation and chemical grouping/read-across. Despite its value, widespread regulatory acceptance of omics data has not yet occurred. Barriers to the routine application of omics data in regulatory decision making have been: 1) lack of transparency for data processing methods used to convert raw data into an interpretable list of observations; and 2) lack of standardization in reporting to ensure that omics data, associated metadata and the methodologies used to generate results are available for review by stakeholders, including regulators. Thus, in 2017, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Extended Advisory Group on Molecular Screening and Toxicogenomics (EAGMST) launched a project to develop guidance for the reporting of omics data aimed at fostering further regulatory use. Here, we report on the ongoing development of the first formal reporting framework describing the processing and analysis of both transcriptomic and metabolomic data for regulatory toxicology. We introduce the modular structure, content, harmonization and strategy for trialling this reporting framework prior to its publication by the OECD.

New ideas for non-animal approaches to predict repeated-dose systemic toxicity: Report from an EPAA Blue Sky Workshop.

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) convened a 'Blue Sky Workshop' on new ideas for non-animal approaches to predict repeated-dose systemic toxicity. The aim of the Workshop was to formulate strategic ideas to improve and increase the applicability, implementation and acceptance of modern non-animal methods to determine systemic toxicity. The Workshop concluded that good progress is being made to assess repeated dose toxicity without animals taking advantage of existing knowledge in toxicology, thresholds of toxicological concern, adverse outcome pathways and read-across workflows. These approaches can be supported by New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) utilising modern molecular technologies and computational methods. Recommendations from the Workshop were based around the needs for better chemical safety assessment: how to strengthen the evidence base for decision making; to develop, standardise and harmonise NAMs for human toxicity; and the improvement in the applicability and acceptance of novel techniques. "Disruptive thinking" is required to reconsider chemical legislation, validation of NAMs and the opportunities to move away from reliance on animal tests. Case study practices and data sharing, ensuring reproducibility of NAMs, were viewed as crucial to the improvement of non-animal test approaches for systemic toxicity.

Reflections on the progress towards non-animal methods for acute toxicity testing of chemicals.

The acute toxicity 'six-pack' is a suite of tests for hazard identification and risk assessment, primarily conducted for the classification and labelling of industrial chemicals and agrochemicals. The 'six-pack' is designed to provide information on health hazards likely to arise from short-term exposure to chemicals via inhalation, oral and dermal routes, including the potential for eye and skin irritation/corrosion and skin sensitization. The component tests of the 'six-pack' currently rely heavily on the use of experimental animals. In 2017, the UK National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs), together with the European Union Reference Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing (EURL-ECVAM), and the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) Centre for the Evaluation of Alternative Methods (NICEATM) held a workshop entitled 'Towards Global Elimination of the Acute Toxicity 'Six-Pack'' to explore opportunities to use alternative (non-animal) methods for hazard identification and classification without compromising human or environmental safety. The Workshop included scientists from regulatory agencies and industrial organisations worldwide, and sought to gain a more detailed understanding of the barriers to the adoption of suitable animal-free alternatives at an international level. Among the issues addressed were: the recurring theme of validation and scientific credibility, as well as the need for international standards, an understanding of the limitations of each new/alternative method and characterisation against the variability of current animal methods. The practicality and cost of new tests was also an important consideration. However, the need for mutual acceptance, and global harmonization of requirements were thought to be the major hurdle to overcome to realise a vision of the eventual complete elimination of the current, animal test-based, acute toxicity 'six-pack'.

Finding synergies for the 3Rs - Repeated Dose Toxicity testing: Report from an EPAA Partners' Forum.

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) convened a Partners' Forum on repeated dose toxicity (RDT) testing to identify synergies between industrial sectors and stakeholders along with opportunities to progress these in existing research frameworks. Although RTD testing is not performed across all industrial sectors, the OECD accepted tests can provide a rich source of information and play a pivotal role for safety decisions relating to the use of chemicals. Currently there are no validated alternatives to repeated dose testing and a direct one-to-one replacement is not appropriate. However, there are many projects and initiatives at the international level which aim to implement various aspects of replacement, reduction and refinement (the 3Rs) in RDT testing. Improved definition of use, through better problem formulation, aligned to harmonisation of regulations is a key area, as is the more rapid implementation of alternatives into the legislative framework. Existing test designs can be optimised to reduce animal use and increase information content. Greater use of exposure-led decisions and improvements in dose selection will be beneficial. In addition, EPAA facilitates sharing of case studies demonstrating the use of Next Generation Risk Assessment applying various New Approach Methodologies to assess RDT.

Microscopy-based high-throughput assays enable multi-parametric analysis to assess adverse effects of nanomaterials in various cell lines.

Manufactured nanomaterials (MNMs) selected from a library of over 120 different MNMs with varied compositions, sizes, and surface coatings were tested by four different laboratories for toxicity by high-throughput/-content (HT/C) techniques. The selected particles comprise 14 MNMs composed of CeO2, Ag, TiO2, ZnO and SiO2 with different coatings and surface characteristics at varying concentrations. The MNMs were tested in different mammalian cell lines at concentrations between 0.5 and 250 µg/mL to link physical-chemical properties to multiple adverse effects. The cell lines are derived from relevant organs such as liver, lung, colon and the immune system. Endpoints such as viable cell count, cell membrane permeability, apoptotic cell death, mitochondrial membrane potential, lysosomal acidification and steatosis have been studied. Soluble MNMs, Ag and ZnO, were toxic in all cell types. TiO2 and SiO2 MNMs also triggered toxicity in some, but not all, cell types and the cell type-specific effects were influenced by the specific coating and surface modification. CeO2 MNMs were nearly ineffective in our test systems. Differentiated liver cells appear to be most sensitive to MNMs, Whereas most of the investigated MNMs showed no acute toxicity, it became clear that some show adverse effects dependent on the assay and cell line. Hence, it is advised that future nanosafety studies utilise a multi-parametric approach such as HT/C screening to avoid missing signs of toxicity. Furthermore, some of the cell type-specific effects should be followed up in more detail and might also provide an incentive to address potential adverse effects in vivo in the relevant organ.

International regulatory requirements for skin sensitization testing.

Skin sensitization test data are required or considered by chemical regulation authorities around the world. These data are used to develop product hazard labeling for the protection of consumers or workers and to assess risks from exposure to skin-sensitizing chemicals. To identify opportunities for regulatory uses of non-animal replacements for skin sensitization tests, the needs and uses for skin sensitization test data must first be clarified. Thus, we reviewed skin sensitization testing requirements for seven countries or regions that are represented in the International Cooperation on Alternative Test Methods (ICATM). We noted the type of skin sensitization data required for each chemical sector and whether these data were used in a hazard classification, potency classification, or risk assessment context; the preferred tests; and whether alternative non-animal tests were acceptable. An understanding of national and regional regulatory requirements for skin sensitization testing will inform the development of ICATM's international strategy for the acceptance and implementation of non-animal alternatives to assess the health hazards and risks associated with potential skin sensitizers.

One science-driven approach for the regulatory implementation of alternative methods: A multi-sector perspective.

EU regulations call for the use of alternative methods to animal testing. During the last decade, an increasing number of alternative approaches have been formally adopted. In parallel, new 3Rs-relevant technologies and mechanistic approaches have increasingly contributed to hazard identification and risk assessment evolution. In this changing landscape, an EPAA meeting reviewed the challenges that different industry sectors face in the implementation of alternative methods following a science-driven approach. Although clear progress was acknowledged in animal testing reduction and refinement thanks to an integration of scientifically robust approaches, the following challenges were identified: i) further characterization of toxicity pathways; ii) development of assays covering current scientific gaps, iii) better characterization of links between in vitro readouts and outcome in the target species; iv) better definition of alternative method applicability domains, and v) appropriate implementation of the available approaches. For areas having regulatory adopted alternative methods (e.g., vaccine batch testing), harmonised acceptance across geographical regions was considered critical for broader application. Overall, the main constraints to the application of non-animal alternatives are the still existing gaps in scientific knowledge and technological limitations. The science-driven identification of most appropriate methods is key for furthering a multi-sectorial decrease in animal testing.

Emerging technologies for food and drug safety.

Emerging technologies are playing a major role in the generation of new approaches to assess the safety of both foods and drugs. However, the integration of emerging technologies in the regulatory decision-making process requires rigorous assessment and consensus amongst international partners and research communities. To that end, the Global Coalition for Regulatory Science Research (GCRSR) in partnership with the Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) hosted the seventh Global Summit on Regulatory Science (GSRS17) in Brasilia, Brazil on September 18-20, 2017 to discuss the role of new approaches in regulatory science with a specific emphasis on applications in food and medical product safety. The global regulatory landscape concerning the application of new technologies was assessed in several countries worldwide. Challenges and issues were discussed in the context of developing an international consensus for objective criteria in the development, application and review of emerging technologies. The need for advanced approaches to allow for faster, less expensive and more predictive methodologies was elaborated. In addition, the strengths and weaknesses of each new approach was discussed. And finally, the need for standards and reproducible approaches was reviewed to enhance the application of the emerging technologies to improve food and drug safety. The overarching goal of GSRS17 was to provide a venue where regulators and researchers meet to develop collaborations addressing the most pressing scientific challenges and facilitate the adoption of novel technical innovations to advance the field of regulatory science.

Adverse outcome pathways: a concise introduction for toxicologists.

Adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) are designed to provide a clear-cut mechanistic representation of critical toxicological effects that propagate over different layers of biological organization from the initial interaction of a chemical with a molecular target to an adverse outcome at the individual or population level. Adverse outcome pathways are currently gaining momentum, especially in view of their many potential applications as pragmatic tools in the fields of human toxicology, ecotoxicology, and risk assessment. A number of guidance documents, issued by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, as well as landmark papers, outlining best practices to develop, assess and use AOPs, have been published in the last few years. The present paper provides a synopsis of the main principles related to the AOP framework for the toxicologist less familiar with this area, followed by two case studies relevant for human toxicology and ecotoxicology.

Adverse outcome pathway development from protein alkylation to liver fibrosis.

In modern toxicology, substantial efforts are undertaken to develop alternative solutions for in vivo toxicity testing. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) concept could facilitate knowledge-based safety assessment of chemicals that does not rely exclusively on in vivo toxicity testing. The construction of an AOP is based on understanding toxicological processes at different levels of biological organisation. Here, we present the developed AOP for liver fibrosis and demonstrate a linkage between hepatic injury caused by chemical protein alkylation and the formation of liver fibrosis, supported by coherent and consistent scientific data. This long-term process, in which inflammation, tissue destruction, and repair occur simultaneously, results from the complex interplay between various hepatic cell types, receptors, and signalling pathways. Due to the complexity of the process, an adequate liver fibrosis cell model for in vitro evaluation of a chemical's fibrogenic potential is not yet available. Liver fibrosis poses an important human health issue that is also relevant for regulatory purposes. An AOP described with enough mechanistic detail might support chemical risk assessment by indicating early markers for downstream events and thus facilitating the development of an in vitro testing strategy. With this work, we demonstrate how the AOP framework can support the assembly and coherent display of distributed mechanistic information from the literature to support the use of alternative approaches for prediction of toxicity. This AOP was developed according to the guidance document on developing and assessing AOPs and its supplement, the users' handbook, issued by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Introduction.

Alternative approaches to animal testing are gaining momentum with an increasing number of test methods obtaining international acceptance, thanks in large part to the validation efforts conducted on these assays. The principles and process of validation were first established in the 1990s in Europe and USA, and further gained international recognition ensuring the broader acceptance of alternative test methods at a regulatory level. If these principles were successful in pioneering the regulatory acceptance of alternative methods for less complex endpoints, an evolution of concepts is needed to embrace emerging technologies and the increased complexity of endpoints. Innovative concepts and approaches of scientific validation can help to ensure the continued regulatory and international acceptance of novel alternative methods and technologies for toxicity testing such as human-based in vitro models derived from induced pluripotent stem cells and significant advances in bioengineering. This chapter provides a historical overview of the establishment and evolution of the principles of the scientific validation of alternative methods for toxicity testing as well as the challenges and opportunities for adapting those principles to keep pace with scientific progress whilst ensuring human safety and best serve the needs of society.

Evolving the Principles and Practice of Validation for New Alternative Approaches to Toxicity Testing.

Validation is essential for the translation of newly developed alternative approaches to animal testing into tools and solutions suitable for regulatory applications. Formal approaches to validation have emerged over the past 20 years or so and although they have helped greatly to progress the field, it is essential that the principles and practice underpinning validation continue to evolve to keep pace with scientific progress. The modular approach to validation should be exploited to encourage more innovation and flexibility in study design and to increase efficiency in filling data gaps. With the focus now on integrated approaches to testing and assessment that are based on toxicological knowledge captured as adverse outcome pathways, and which incorporate the latest in vitro and computational methods, validation needs to adapt to ensure it adds value rather than hinders progress. Validation needs to be pursued both at the method level, to characterise the performance of in vitro methods in relation their ability to detect any association of a chemical with a particular pathway or key toxicological event, and at the methodological level, to assess how integrated approaches can predict toxicological endpoints relevant for regulatory decision making. To facilitate this, more emphasis needs to be given to the development of performance standards that can be applied to classes of methods and integrated approaches that provide similar information. Moreover, the challenge of selecting the right reference chemicals to support validation needs to be addressed more systematically, consistently and in a manner that better reflects the state of the science. Above all however, validation requires true partnership between the development and user communities of alternative methods and the appropriate investment of resources.

International Harmonization and Cooperation in the Validation of Alternative Methods.

The development and validation of scientific alternatives to animal testing is important not only from an ethical perspective (implementation of 3Rs), but also to improve safety assessment decision making with the use of mechanistic information of higher relevance to humans. To be effective in these efforts, it is however imperative that validation centres, industry, regulatory bodies, academia and other interested parties ensure a strong international cooperation, cross-sector collaboration and intense communication in the design, execution, and peer review of validation studies. Such an approach is critical to achieve harmonized and more transparent approaches to method validation, peer-review and recommendation, which will ultimately expedite the international acceptance of valid alternative methods or strategies by regulatory authorities and their implementation and use by stakeholders. It also allows achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness by avoiding duplication of effort and leveraging limited resources. In view of achieving these goals, the International Cooperation on Alternative Test Methods (ICATM) was established in 2009 by validation centres from Europe, USA, Canada and Japan. ICATM was later joined by Korea in 2011 and currently also counts with Brazil and China as observers. This chapter describes the existing differences across world regions and major efforts carried out for achieving consistent international cooperation and harmonization in the validation and adoption of alternative approaches to animal testing.

Putative adverse outcome pathways relevant to neurotoxicity.

The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework provides a template that facilitates understanding of complex biological systems and the pathways of toxicity that result in adverse outcomes (AOs). The AOP starts with an molecular initiating event (MIE) in which a chemical interacts with a biological target(s), followed by a sequential series of KEs, which are cellular, anatomical, and/or functional changes in biological processes, that ultimately result in an AO manifest in individual organisms and populations. It has been developed as a tool for a knowledge-based safety assessment that relies on understanding mechanisms of toxicity, rather than simply observing its adverse outcome. A large number of cellular and molecular processes are known to be crucial to proper development and function of the central (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems (PNS). However, there are relatively few examples of well-documented pathways that include causally linked MIEs and KEs that result in adverse outcomes in the CNS or PNS. As a first step in applying the AOP framework to adverse health outcomes associated with exposure to exogenous neurotoxic substances, the EU Reference Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing (EURL ECVAM) organized a workshop (March 2013, Ispra, Italy) to identify potential AOPs relevant to neurotoxic and developmental neurotoxic outcomes. Although the AOPs outlined during the workshop are not fully described, they could serve as a basis for further, more detailed AOP development and evaluation that could be useful to support human health risk assessment in a variety of ways.

SEURAT: Safety Evaluation Ultimately Replacing Animal Testing--recommendations for future research in the field of predictive toxicology.

The development of non-animal methodology to evaluate the potential for a chemical to cause systemic toxicity is one of the grand challenges of modern science. The European research programme SEURAT is active in this field and will conclude its first phase, SEURAT-1, in December 2015. Drawing on the experience gained in SEURAT-1 and appreciating international advancement in both basic and regulatory science, we reflect here on how SEURAT should evolve and propose that further research and development should be directed along two complementary and interconnecting work streams. The first work stream would focus on developing new 'paradigm' approaches for regulatory science. The goal here is the identification of 'critical biological targets' relevant for toxicity and to test their suitability to be used as anchors for predicting toxicity. The second work stream would focus on integration and application of new approach methods for hazard (and risk) assessment within the current regulatory 'paradigm', aiming for acceptance of animal-free testing strategies by regulatory authorities (i.e. translating scientific achievements into regulation). Components for both work streams are discussed and may provide a structure for a future research programme in the field of predictive toxicology.