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.

Assessment of human plasma and urine sample preparation for reproducible and high-throughput UHPLC-MS clinical metabolic phenotyping.

Clinical metabolic phenotyping employs metabolomics and lipidomics to detect and measure hundreds to thousands of metabolites and lipids within human samples. This approach aims to identify metabolite and lipid changes between phenotypes (e.g. disease status) that aid understanding of biochemical mechanisms driving the phenotype. Sample preparation is a critical step in clinical metabolic phenotyping: it must be reproducible and give a high extraction yield of metabolites and lipids, and in high-throughput studies it needs to be rapid. Here, we assessed the extraction of polar metabolites from human urine and polar metabolites and lipids from human plasma for analysis by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS) metabolomics and lipidomics. We evaluated several monophasic (urine and plasma) and biphasic (plasma) extractions, and we also tested alterations to (a) solvent-biofluid incubation time and temperature during monophasic extraction, and (b) phase partitioning time during biphasic extraction. Extracts were analysed by three UHPLC-MS assays: (i) hydrophilic interaction chromatography (HILIC) for urine and plasma, (ii) C18 aqueous reversed phase for urine, and (iii) C18 reversed phase for plasma lipids, and the yield and reproducibility of each method was assessed. We measured UHPLC-MS injection reproducibility as well as sample preparation reproducibility to assess sample solvent composition compatibility with UHPLC-MS and to pinpoint the origin of variance within the methods. For HILIC UHPLC-MS plasma and urine analysis, monophasic 50 : 50 methanol : acetonitrile had the most detected putatively-identified polar metabolites with high method reproducibility. This method had the highest lipid yield for plasma extracts analysed by the HILIC method. If lipid removal from the plasma polar HILIC extract is required, then the biphasic methanol/chloroform/water method is recommended. For C18 (aqueous) UHPLC-MS urine analysis, 50 : 50 methanol : water had high reproducibility and yield. For C18 UHPLC-MS plasma lipidomics, monophasic 100% isopropanol had the highest detection response of all annotated lipid classes with high reproducibility. Increasing monophasic incubation time and temperature had little benefit on metabolite and lipid yield and reproducibility for all methods.

Applying 'omics technologies in chemicals risk assessment: Report of an ECETOC workshop.

Prevailing knowledge gaps in linking specific molecular changes to apical outcomes and methodological uncertainties in the generation, storage, processing, and interpretation of 'omics data limit the application of 'omics technologies in regulatory toxicology. Against this background, the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) convened a workshop Applying 'omics technologies in chemicals risk assessment that is reported herein. Ahead of the workshop, multi-expert teams drafted frameworks on best practices for (i) a Good-Laboratory Practice-like context for collecting, storing and curating 'omics data; (ii) the processing of 'omics data; and (iii) weight-of-evidence approaches for integrating 'omics data. The workshop participants confirmed the relevance of these Frameworks to facilitate the regulatory applicability and use of 'omics data, and the workshop discussions provided input for their further elaboration. Additionally, the key objective (iv) to establish approaches to connect 'omics perturbations to phenotypic alterations was addressed. Generally, it was considered promising to strive to link gene expression changes and pathway perturbations to the phenotype by mapping them to specific adverse outcome pathways. While further work is necessary before gene expression changes can be used to establish safe levels of substance exposure, the ECETOC workshop provided important incentives towards achieving this goal.