Integrating toxicokinetics into toxicology studies and the human health risk assessment process for chemicals: Reduced uncertainty, better health protection.

The database of practical examples where toxicokinetic (TK) data has benefitted all stages of the human health risk assessment process are increasingly being published and accepted. This review aimed to highlight and summarise notable examples and to describe the "state of the art" in this field. The overall recommendation is that for any in vivo animal study conducted, measurements of TK should be very carefully considered for inclusion as the numerous benefits this brings continues to grow, particularly during the current march towards animal free toxicology testing and ambitions to eventually conduct human health risk assessments entirely based upon non-animal methods.

Contemporary Activities of Toxicologic Pathology Societies.

Educational activities and training opportunities in toxicologic pathology are major goals of 9 formally established Toxicologic Pathology Societies and the International Academy of Toxicologic Pathology. Some Toxicologic Pathology Societies have examination-based certification programs while others accept certification or registration by veterinary pathology organizations including the American College of Veterinary Pathologists, the European College of Veterinary Pathologists. We summarize here the membership numbers and current activities of formally established Toxicologic Pathology Socities.

Setting the stage for next-generation risk assessment with non-animal approaches: the EU-ToxRisk project experience.

In 2016, the European Commission launched the EU-ToxRisk research project to develop and promote animal-free approaches in toxicology. The 36 partners of this consortium used in vitro and in silico methods in the context of case studies (CSs). These CSs included both compounds with a highly defined target (e.g. mitochondrial respiratory chain inhibitors) as well as compounds with poorly defined molecular initiation events (e.g. short-chain branched carboxylic acids). The initial project focus was on developing a science-based strategy for read-across (RAx) as an animal-free approach in chemical risk assessment. Moreover, seamless incorporation of new approach method (NAM) data into this process (= NAM-enhanced RAx) was explored. Here, the EU-ToxRisk consortium has collated its scientific and regulatory learnings from this particular project objective. For all CSs, a mechanistic hypothesis (in the form of an adverse outcome pathway) guided the safety evaluation. ADME data were generated from NAMs and used for comprehensive physiological-based kinetic modelling. Quality assurance and data management were optimized in parallel. Scientific and Regulatory Advisory Boards played a vital role in assessing the practical applicability of the new approaches. In a next step, external stakeholders evaluated the usefulness of NAMs in the context of RAx CSs for regulatory acceptance. For instance, the CSs were included in the OECD CS portfolio for the Integrated Approach to Testing and Assessment project. Feedback from regulators and other stakeholders was collected at several stages. Future chemical safety science projects can draw from this experience to implement systems toxicology-guided, animal-free next-generation risk assessment.

A Multidisciplinary Toxicity Team for Cancer Immunotherapy-Related Adverse Events.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Methods to obtain real-time multidisciplinary input for irAEs that require subspecialist care are unknown. This study aimed to determine whether a virtual multidisciplinary immune-related toxicity (IR-tox) team of oncology and medicine subspecialists would be feasible to implement, be used by oncology providers, and identify patients for whom multidisciplinary input is sought. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients treated with ICIs and referred to the IR-tox team in August 2017 through March 2018 were identified. Feasibility was defined as receipt of electronic referrals and provision of recommendations within 24 hours of referral. Use was defined as the proportion of referring providers who used the team's recommendations, which was determined through a postpilot survey. Demographics and tumor, treatment, and referral data were collected. Patient features and irAE associations were analyzed. RESULTS: The IR-tox team was found to be feasible and used: 117 referrals from 102 patients were received in 8 months, all providers received recommendations within 24 hours, 100% of surveyed providers used the recommendations, and 74% changed patient management based on IR-tox team recommendations. Referrals were for suspected irAEs (n=106; 91%) and suitability to treat with ICIs (n=11; 10%). In referred patients, median age was 64 years, 54% were men, 13% had prior autoimmunity, and 46% received ICI combinations versus monotherapy (54%). The most commonly referred toxicities were pneumonitis (23%), arthritis (16%), and dermatitis (15%); 15% of patients had multisystem toxicities. Multiple referrals were more common in those treated with combination ICIs (odds ratio [OR], 6.0; P=.035) or with multisystem toxicities (OR, 8.1; P=.005). The IR-tox team provided a new multidisciplinary forum to assist providers in diagnosing and managing complex irAEs. This model identifies educational and service needs, and patients with irAEs for whom multidisciplinary care is most sought. CONCLUSIONS: A virtual multidisciplinary toxicity team for irAEs was a feasible and used service, and facilitated toxicity identification and management.

NTP/NIEHS Global Contributions to Toxicologic Pathology.

National Toxicology Program (NTP) pathologists are engaged in important initiatives that have significant global impact. These initiatives build on its leadership in pathology peer review and publications in the areas of toxicologic pathology, clinical pathology, and laboratory animal medicine. Over the past decade, NTP/National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences research initiatives have focused on cancer and noncancer hazard identification, with the goal of understanding cellular and molecular mechanisms of disease. New initiatives of significant global impact include the web-based nonneoplastic lesion atlas and an NTP partnership with international scientists to investigate molecular mechanisms at the whole genome level, which will be used to inform potential mechanisms of environmental exposures in human cancers. Also, we are dedicated to contributing to pathology and toxicology organizations through service on executive committees and editorial boards, participating in international projects and symposiums, and providing training for future leaders in toxicologic pathology. Herein, we provide highlights of our global contributions.

Adverse Outcome Pathways-Organizing Toxicological Information to Improve Decision Making.

The number of chemicals for which environmental regulatory decisions are required far exceeds the current capacity for toxicity testing. High-throughput screening commonly used for drug discovery has the potential to increase this capacity. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) concept has emerged as a framework for connecting high-throughput toxicity testing (HTT) and other results to potential impacts on human and wildlife populations. As a result of international efforts, the AOP development process is now well-defined and efforts are underway to broaden the participation through outreach and training. One key principle is that AOPs represent the chemical-agnostic portions of pathways to increase the generalizability of their application from early key events to overt toxicity. The closely related mode of action framework extends the AOP as needed when evaluating the potential risk of a specific chemical. This in turn enables integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA), which incorporate results of assays at various levels of biologic organization such as in silico; HTT; chemical-specific aspects including absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME); and an AOP describing the biologic basis of toxicity. Thus, it is envisaged that provision of limited information regarding both the AOP for critical effects and the ADME for any chemical associated with any adverse outcome would allow for the development of IATA and permit more detailed AOP and ADME research, where higher precision is needed based on the decision context.

International Harmonization of Nomenclature and Diagnostic Criteria (INHAND) for Lesions in the Minipig.

The International Harmonization of Nomenclature and Diagnostic Criteria (INHAND) is a global project establishing diagnostic criteria and nomenclature for both proliferative and nonproliferative changes in laboratory animals. Nonrodent working groups (NRWGs) have been established for the dog, nonhuman primate, minipig, and the rabbit. The Global Editorial and Steering Committee (GESC) oversees the activities of the INHAND projects and is composed of toxicologic pathologists from all of the participating societies. In 2012, INHAND GESC began a collaboration with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) in adapting INHAND terminology for standardized nonclinical data submission to the FDA. The Standard for Exchange of Nonclinical Data is an implementation of the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium Study Data Tabulation Model for nonclinical studies. The NRWG for the minipig consists of toxicologic and diagnostic pathologists from Japan, North America, and Europe, and the group has 15 members including a GESC representative. The NRWGs are reviewing the applicability of the rodent nomenclature for the species and providing terminology unique for the species as well as determining rodent terminology not appropriate for the species. This information will be published with representative illustrations and references.

Highlight report: Launch of a large integrated European in vitro toxicology project: EU-ToxRisk.

The integrated European project, EU-ToxRisk, proudly sees itself as "flagship" exploring new alternative-to-animal approaches to chemical safety evaluation. It promotes mechanism-based toxicity testing and risk assessment according to the principles laid down for toxicology for the twenty-first century. The project was officially launched in January 2016 with a kickoff meeting in Egmond aan Zee, the Netherlands. Over 100 scientists representing academia and industry as well as regulatory authorities attended the inaugural meeting. The project will integrate advances in in vitro and in silico toxicology, read-across methods, and adverse outcome pathways. EU-ToxRisk will continue to make use of the case study strategy deployed in SEURAT-1, a FP7 initiative ended in December 2015. Even though the development of new non-animal methods is one target of EU-ToxRisk, the project puts special emphasis on their acceptance and implementation in regulatory contexts. This €30 million Horizon 2020 project involves 38 European partners and one from the USA. EU-ToxRisk aims at the "development of a new way of risk assessment."

Toxicology: a discipline in need of academic anchoring--the point of view of the German Society of Toxicology.

The paper describes the importance of toxicology as a discipline, its past achievements, current scientific challenges, and future development. Toxicological expertise is instrumental in the reduction of human health risks arising from chemicals and drugs. Toxicological assessment is needed to evaluate evidence and arguments, whether or not there is a scientific base for concern. The immense success already achieved by toxicological work is exemplified by reduced pollution of air, soil, water, and safer working places. Predominantly predictive toxicological testing is derived from the findings to assess risks to humans and the environment. Assessment of the adversity of molecular effects (including epigenetic effects), the effects of mixtures, and integration of exposure and biokinetics into in vitro testing are emerging challenges for toxicology. Toxicology is a translational science with its base in fundamental science. Academic institutions play an essential part by providing scientific innovation and education of young scientists.

The Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative: purpose, organization, and methodology.

INTRODUCTION: Scientific societies aim to provide a collective voice and unified stance on important issues. The Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative was formed in 2016 to develop evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for the management of patients exposed to common and/or serious poisonings for which the management is unclear or controversial. ORGANIZATION: The Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative is led jointly by the American Academy of Clinical Toxicology, the Asia Pacific Association of Medical Toxicology, and the European Association of Poison Centres and Clinical Toxicologists. The Governance Committee is chaired by a Past-President of one of these Societies and comprised of the six Presidents and Immediate Past-Presidents of the three Societies. A Steering Committee oversees the process of each project workgroup. METHODOLOGY: The overall process is guided by standards set forth by the Institute of Medicine for developing trustworthy guidelines and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument. Systematic reviews are produced using the framework set in the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology. Workgroup members jointly review the evidence and prepare statements on which they vote anonymously using a 9-point Likert scale. A two-round modified Delphi method is used to reach a consensus on clinical recommendations using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Final recommendations are approved by unanimous consent of the workgroup and are expressed as both levels of evidence and strength of recommendations. LIMITATIONS: The major limitations of the Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative process centre around the amount and quality of evidence, the assessment of that evidence, and the voting of the panel. CONCLUSIONS: By using a transparent evidence- and consensus-based approach to produce systematic reviews and clinical recommendations, the Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative aims to create an international framework for clinical toxicology education and decision-making and foster positive change for the benefit of poisoned patients.

Regulatory forum opinion piece: Tox21 and toxicologic pathology.

Tox21 is a transformative effort on the part of several U.S. Federal agencies (the National Toxicology Program/National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [NTP], the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Chemical Genomics Center/National Human Genome Research Institute [NCGC; now called the NIH Center for Translational Therapeutics, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences] the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Center for Computational Toxicology, and recently the Food and Drug Administration) that are partnering to fundamentally change the science of safety toxicology. These agencies bring a comprehensive suite of capabilities and are working diligently together to develop, evaluate, and ultimately implement a new safety assessment paradigm. Toxicologic pathology has an important ongoing role in establishing the validity of this transformation, and may ultimately benefit as a discipline through an enhanced understanding of chemically induced disease mechanisms.

Developing and delivering clinical toxicology in the UK National Health Service.

Clinical toxicology concerns the investigation, diagnosis and management of suspected poisoning. It is an important discipline because of the frequency of suspected poisoning, including drug overdose. In the UK, most episodes are managed by nonspecialists, with support provided online or by telephone from the National Poisons Information Service. Leadership and clinical support for this is provided by a small number of clinical toxicologists, who are almost invariably accredited specialists in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. Priorities for maintaining and enhancing clinical toxicology as a subspeciality in the UK include: 1 Maintaining funding for poisons centres. This is essential in spite of current budgetary pressures. 2 Formal training in the discipline. The 1 year optional training module in clinical toxicology approved in 2011 as part of the clinical pharmacology and therapeutics curriculum represents important progress, but funding for appropriate programmes and accreditation for trainees from other relevant disciplines is needed. Arrangements for registration and revalidation are also required. 3 An improved evidence base for management of poisoning. Priority areas include continued surveillance of the epidemiology and outcomes of poisoning, including syndromic surveillance, more rapid characterization of the human toxicity of newly introduced medicines and better clinical evidence on use of antidotes and other treatments; for example, acetylcysteine and lipid emulsion therapy.

Industry-contract research organization pathology interactions: a perspective of contract research organizations in producing the best quality pathology report.

This article provides observations on the features of sponsor-contract research organization communication that will achieve the best quality pathology report based on our collective experience. Information on the test article and any anticipated findings should be provided, and initial slide examination should be done with knowledge of treatment group (but may be followed by blinded review of target tissues to determine no-effect levels). Only a pathologist should write or revise the pathology report or the pathology section of the overall study report. To address concerns related to undue sponsor influence, comments by sponsors should be presented as suggestions rather than directives. Adversity should be defined for each finding by the study pathologist, but the no-observed adverse effect level should not be discussed in the pathology report. Board-certified pathologists are recommended, but are not essential. Sponsors that have a particular format or report preferences should make them known well in advance. Histologic processing "to glass" of protocol-specified tissues from all dosage groups is recommended for rapid evaluation of target tissues. Telepathology is beneficial in certain situations, but it is usually more efficient for the study pathologist and reviewing pathologist to be in the same physical location to review differences of opinion and reach a consensus.

Telephonic Medical Toxicology Service in a Low-Resource Setting: Setup, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Poisoning and envenomation are a global health problem for which the mortality burden is shouldered heavily by middle- and low-income countries that often lack poison prevention programs and medical toxicology expertise. Although telehealth or teleconsult services have been used to bridge the expertise gap between countries for multiple specialties, the use of medical toxicology teleconsult services across borders has been limited. We aim to describe the use of a United States-based medical toxicology teleconsult service to support patient care at a hospital in a middle-income country that lacks this expertise. This report outlines the logistics involved in setting up such a service, including the challenges and opportunities that emerged from establishing medical toxicology teleconsult service in a low-resource setting.

Preventing errors in patient management: the emergency department clinician and the toxicology laboratory.

Poor communication between the clinical toxicologist and the toxicology laboratory can result in a variety of problems. Clinicians must familiarize themselves with the toxicology assays that are available in their hospital and how to interpret assay results. Toxicology tests ordered in the emergency department should provide useful information for patient management and disposition. Toxicology laboratory personnel should have a good working relationship with emergency department clinicians and clinical toxicologists to maximize the usefulness of the laboratory in patient management.