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.

The implementation of RAAF in the OECD QSAR Toolbox.

The Read-Across Assessment Framework (RAAF) was developed by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) as an internal tool providing a framework for a consistent, structured and transparent assessment of grouping of chemicals and read-across. Following a RAAF-based evaluation, also developers and users of read-across predictions outside ECHA can judge whether their read-across rationale is sufficiently robust from a regulatory perspective. The aim of this paper is to describe the implementation of RAAF functionalities in the OECD QSAR Toolbox report. These can be activated in the prediction report after performing a readacross prediction. Once the user manually selects the appropriate scenario, the RAAF assessment elements appear and are automatically aligned with the suitable category elements of the Toolbox report. Subsequently, these are evaluated as part of the category consistency assessment functionality. The implementation of the RAAF functionality is illustrated in practice with two examples.

Development of micro-electrode array based tests for neurotoxicity: assessment of interlaboratory reproducibility with neuroactive chemicals.

Neuronal assemblies within the nervous system produce electrical activity that can be recorded in terms of action potential patterns. Such patterns provide a sensitive endpoint to detect effects of a variety of chemical and physical perturbations. They are a function of synaptic changes and do not necessarily involve structural alterations. In vitro neuronal networks (NNs) grown on micro-electrode arrays (MEAs) respond to neuroactive substances as well as the in vivo brain. As such, they constitute a valuable tool for investigating changes in the electrophysiological activity of the neurons in response to chemical exposures. However, the reproducibility of NN responses to chemical exposure has not been systematically documented. To this purpose six independent laboratories (in Europe and in USA) evaluated the response to the same pharmacological compounds (Fluoxetine, Muscimol, and Verapamil) in primary neuronal cultures. Common standardization principles and acceptance criteria for the quality of the cultures have been established to compare the obtained results. These studies involved more than 100 experiments before the final conclusions have been drawn that MEA technology has a potential for standard in vitro neurotoxicity/neuropharmacology evaluation. The obtained results show good intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility of the responses. The consistent inhibitory effects of the compounds were observed in all the laboratories with the 50% Inhibiting Concentrations (IC(50)s) ranging from: (mean ± SEM, in µM) 1.53 ± 0.17 to 5.4 ± 0.7 (n = 35) for Fluoxetine, 0.16 ± 0.03 to 0.38 ± 0.16 µM (n = 35) for Muscimol, and 2.68 ± 0.32 to 5.23 ± 1.7 (n = 32) for Verapamil. The outcome of this study indicates that the MEA approach is a robust tool leading to reproducible results. The future direction will be to extend the set of testing compounds and to propose the MEA approach as a standard screen for identification and prioritization of chemicals with neurotoxicity potential.