Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
Add more filters











Publication year range
1.
Adv Biol (Weinh) ; : e2300131, 2023 Oct 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37814378

ABSTRACT

In May 2022, there is an International Regulatory and Pharmaceutical Industry (Innovation and Quality [IQ] Microphysiological Systems [MPS] Affiliate) Workshop on the standardization of complex in vitro models (CIVMs) in drug development. This manuscript summarizes the discussions and conclusions of this joint workshop organized and executed by the IQ MPS Affiliate and the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A key objective of the workshop is to facilitate discussions around opportunities and/or needs for standardization of MPS and chart potential pathways to increase model utilization in the context of regulatory decision making. Participation in the workshop included 200 attendees from the FDA, IQ MPS Affiliate, and 26 global regulatory organizations and affiliated parties representing Europe, Japan, and Canada. It is agreed that understanding global perspectives regarding the readiness of CIVM/MPS models for regulatory decision making and potential pathways to gaining acceptance is useful to align on globally. The obstacles are currently too great to develop standards for every context of use (COU). Instead, it is suggested that a more tractable approach may be to think of broadly applicable standards that can be applied regardless of COU and/or organ system. Considerations and next steps for this effort are described.

2.
Front Toxicol ; 5: 1140698, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36923365

ABSTRACT

The ethical needs and concerns with use and sourcing of human materials, particularly serum, in OECD in vitro test guidelines were explored in a dedicated international workshop held in 2019. The health-related aspects of the donation procedure, including tissue screening, donor health, laboratory work health protection, permission from the donor for commercial use, payment of the donors and the potential for exploitation of low-income populations and data protection of the donors; supply, availability, and competition with clinical needs; traceability of the serum and auditability/GLP needs for the Test Guideline Programme, were examined. Here we provide the recommendations of the workshop with respect to the use of human serum, and potentially other human reagents, specifically with regard to test method development for OECD Test Guideline utility as part of the Mutual Acceptance of Data requirement across all OECD member countries. These include informed donor consent terminology, a checklist of human serum information requirements to be included with the Good Laboratory Practise report, and suitable sources for human serum to ensure waste supplies are used, that can no longer be used for medical purposes, ensuring no competition of supply for essential medical use.

3.
Front Toxicol ; 4: 887135, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35875696

ABSTRACT

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS) are formed as a result of natural cellular processes, intracellular signaling, or as adverse responses associated with diseases or exposure to oxidizing chemical and non-chemical stressors. The action of ROS and RNS, collectively referred to as reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (RONS), has recently become highly relevant in a number of adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) that capture, organize, evaluate and portray causal relationships pertinent to adversity or disease progression. RONS can potentially act as a key event (KE) in the cascade of responses leading to an adverse outcome (AO) within such AOPs, but are also known to modulate responses of events along the AOP continuum without being an AOP event itself. A substantial discussion has therefore been undertaken in a series of workshops named "Mystery or ROS" to elucidate the role of RONS in disease and adverse effects associated with exposure to stressors such as nanoparticles, chemical, and ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. This review introduces the background for RONS production, reflects on the direct and indirect effects of RONS, addresses the diversity of terminology used in different fields of research, and provides guidance for developing a harmonized approach for defining a common event terminology within the AOP developer community.

4.
Food Chem Toxicol ; 152: 112206, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33887398

ABSTRACT

We describe the characterisation and validation of an androgen receptor (AR) transactivation assay for detection of AR agonists and antagonists using a stably transfected human prostate cancer cell line. This 22Rv1/mouse mammary tumour virus glucocorticoid knock-out cell line based AR transactivation assay was validated by criteria in Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Guidance Document 34 to determine if the assay performed equally well to the AR EcoScreen Assay included in Test Guideline for AR Transactivation (OECD TG 458). There was no Glucocorticoid Receptor (GR) crosstalk, and no changes in the AR DNA sequence in cells after the successful knock out of GR. Subsequently, the concordance of classifications of the 22 test chemicals was 100% in all laboratories. The AR agonistic and antagonistic inter-laboratory coefficients of variation based on log[10% effect for 10 nM DHT, PC10] and log[inhibitory response of 800 pM DHT by at 30%, IC30] from comprehensive tests were 2.75% and 2.44%, respectively. The AR agonist/antagonist test chemical classifications were consistent across AR EcoScreen ARTA assay data for 82/89%, and the balanced accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 83/90%, 88/100% and 78/80%, respectively. This assay was successfully validated and was approved for inclusion in TG 458 in 2020.


Subject(s)
Androgen Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , Androgens/pharmacology , Drug Evaluation, Preclinical/methods , Receptors, Androgen/metabolism , Animals , Cell Line, Tumor , Gene Knockout Techniques , Humans , Mammary Tumor Virus, Mouse , Mice , Receptors, Glucocorticoid/deficiency , Receptors, Glucocorticoid/genetics , Reproducibility of Results , Transcriptional Activation/drug effects
5.
Int J Radiat Biol ; 97(4): 431-441, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33539251

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Decades of research to understand the impacts of various types of environmental occupational and medical stressors on human health have produced a vast amount of data across many scientific disciplines. Organizing these data in a meaningful way to support risk assessment has been a significant challenge. To address this and other challenges in modernizing chemical health risk assessment, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) formalized the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) framework, an approach to consolidate knowledge into measurable key events (KEs) at various levels of biological organisation causally linked to disease based on the weight of scientific evidence (http://oe.cd/aops). Currently, AOPs have been considered predominantly in chemical safety but are relevant to radiation. In this context, the Nuclear Energy Agency's (NEA's) High-Level Group on Low Dose Research (HLG-LDR) is working to improve research co-ordination, including radiological research with chemical research, identify synergies between the fields and to avoid duplication of efforts and resource investments. To this end, a virtual workshop was held on 7 and 8 October 2020 with experts from the OECD AOP Programme together with the radiation and chemical research/regulation communities. The workshop was a coordinated effort of Health Canada, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), and the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). The AOP approach was discussed including key issues to fully embrace its value and catalyze implementation in areas of radiation risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: A joint chemical and radiological expert group was proposed as a means to encourage cooperation between risk assessors and an initial vision was discussed on a path forward. A global survey was suggested as a way to identify priority health outcomes of regulatory interest for AOP development. Multidisciplinary teams are needed to address the challenge of producing the appropriate data for risk assessments. Data management and machine learning tools were highlighted as a way to progress from weight of evidence to computational causal inference.


Subject(s)
Adverse Outcome Pathways , Intersectoral Collaboration , Science , Humans , Internationality , Risk Assessment
6.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ; 118: 104789, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33035627

ABSTRACT

Currently the only methods for non-genotoxic carcinogenic hazard assessment accepted by most regulatory authorities are lifetime carcinogenicity studies. However, these involve the use of large numbers of animals and the relevance of their predictive power and results has been scientifically challenged. With increased availability of innovative test methods and enhanced understanding of carcinogenic processes, it is believed that tumour formation can now be better predicted using mechanistic information. A workshop organised by the European Partnership on Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing brought together experts to discuss an alternative, mechanism-based approach for cancer risk assessment of agrochemicals. Data from a toolbox of test methods for detecting modes of action (MOAs) underlying non-genotoxic carcinogenicity are combined with information from subchronic toxicity studies in a weight-of-evidence approach to identify carcinogenic potential of a test substance. The workshop included interactive sessions to discuss the approach using case studies. These showed that fine-tuning is needed, to build confidence in the proposed approach, to ensure scientific correctness, and to address different regulatory needs. This novel approach was considered realistic, and its regulatory acceptance and implementation can be facilitated in the coming years through continued dialogue between all stakeholders and building confidence in alternative approaches.


Subject(s)
Agrochemicals/adverse effects , Animal Testing Alternatives , Carcinogenicity Tests , Cell Transformation, Neoplastic/chemically induced , Neoplasms/chemically induced , Animals , Cell Transformation, Neoplastic/genetics , Cell Transformation, Neoplastic/metabolism , Cell Transformation, Neoplastic/pathology , Congresses as Topic , Humans , Mutagenicity Tests , Neoplasms/genetics , Neoplasms/metabolism , Neoplasms/pathology , Risk Assessment , Toxicity Tests, Subchronic , Toxicokinetics
7.
Arch Toxicol ; 94(8): 2899-2923, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32594184

ABSTRACT

While regulatory requirements for carcinogenicity testing of chemicals vary according to product sector and regulatory jurisdiction, the standard approach starts with a battery of genotoxicity tests (which include mutagenicity assays). If any of the in vivo genotoxicity tests are positive, a lifetime rodent cancer bioassay may be requested, but under most chemical regulations (except plant protection, biocides, pharmaceuticals), this is rare. The decision to conduct further testing based on genotoxicity test outcomes creates a regulatory gap for the identification of non-genotoxic carcinogens (NGTxC). With the objective of addressing this gap, in 2016, the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) established an expert group to develop an integrated approach to the testing and assessment (IATA) of NGTxC. Through that work, a definition of NGTxC in a regulatory context was agreed. Using the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) concept, various cancer models were developed, and overarching mechanisms and modes of action were identified. After further refining and structuring with respect to the common hallmarks of cancer and knowing that NGTxC act through a large variety of specific mechanisms, with cell proliferation commonly being a unifying element, it became evident that a panel of tests covering multiple biological traits will be needed to populate the IATA. Consequently, in addition to literature and database investigation, the OECD opened a call for relevant assays in 2018 to receive suggestions. Here, we report on the definition of NGTxC, on the development of the overarching NGTxC IATA, and on the development of ranking parameters to evaluate the assays. Ultimately the intent is to select the best scoring assays for integration in an NGTxC IATA to better identify carcinogens and reduce public health hazards.


Subject(s)
Carcinogenicity Tests/standards , Carcinogens/toxicity , Animals , Consensus , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Risk Assessment
8.
Reprod Toxicol ; 89: 124-129, 2019 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31288076

ABSTRACT

Representatives of applied science (e.g. governmental organizations, academia, and industry) met to discuss the progress towards a harmonized human health risk assessment in developmental toxicology of plant protection products, biocidal products, and other environmental chemicals at the 9th Berlin Workshop on Developmental Toxicity held in September 2018. Within the focus of the scientific discussion were the future of in-vitro methods for developmental and reproductive toxicology, the potential relevance of alternative species in testing of developmental effects, and risk and hazard assessment of developmental and endocrine effects. Furthermore, the need for a harmonized terminology for classification of anomalies in laboratory animals in developmental toxicity studies aiming for human health risk assessment was determined. Here, the DevTox database was identified as an extremely valuable tool. Overall, the participants agreed that still one of the biggest challenges for testing developmental toxicity in the 21st century is the development of animal-free test strategies and alternatives to animal testing that could provide human-relevant information in a rapid, efficient, and mechanistically informative manner.


Subject(s)
Animal Use Alternatives/methods , Databases, Factual/trends , Reproduction/drug effects , Toxicology/methods , Animal Use Alternatives/trends , Animals , Berlin , Risk Assessment , Species Specificity , Terminology as Topic , Toxicology/trends
9.
ALTEX ; 35(2): 179-192, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28968481

ABSTRACT

Significant progress has been made in the development and validation of non-animal test methods for skin sensitization assessment. At present, three of the four key events of the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) are assessable by OECD-accepted in vitro methods. The fourth key event describes the immunological response in the draining lymph node where activated dendritic cells present major histocompatibility complex-bound chemically modified peptides to naive T cells, thereby priming the proliferation of antigen-specific T cells. Despite substantial efforts, modelling and assessing this adaptive immune response to sensitizers with in vitro T cell assays still represents a challenge. The Cosmetics Europe Skin Tolerance Task Force organized a workshop, bringing together academic researchers, method developers, industry representatives and regulatory stakeholders to review the scientific status of T cell-based assays, foster a mutual scientific understanding and conceive new options to assess T cell activation. Participants agreed that current T cell assays have come a long way in predicting immunogenicity, but that further investment and collaboration is required to simplify assays, optimize their sensitivity, better define human donor-to-donor variability and evaluate their value to predict sensitizer potency. Furthermore, the potential role of T cell assays in AOP-based testing strategies and subsequent safety assessment concepts for cosmetic ingredients was discussed. It was agreed that it is currently difficult to anticipate uses of T cell assay data for safety assessment and concluded that experience from case studies on real-life risk assessment scenarios is needed to further consider the usefulness of assessing the fourth AOP key event.


Subject(s)
Allergens/analysis , Biological Assay , Cosmetics/analysis , Lymphocyte Activation/drug effects , T-Lymphocytes , Adverse Outcome Pathways , Consumer Product Safety , Humans , In Vitro Techniques/methods , In Vitro Techniques/standards , Skin/drug effects , Skin Tests/standards , Skin Tests/trends
10.
Altern Lab Anim ; 44(5): 417-429, 2016 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27805824

ABSTRACT

The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) concept is expected to guide risk assessors in their work to use all existing information on the effects of chemicals on humans and wildlife, and to target the generation of additional information to the regulatory objective. AOPs will therefore be used in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) chemical safety programme, as underlying scientific rationales for the development of alternative methods for hazard assessment, such as read-across, in vitro test methods or the development of integrated testing strategies that have the potential to replace animal tests. As a proof-of-concept, the OECD has developed an AOP for skin sensitisation, and as a follow-up has: a) implemented the AOP into the OECD QSAR Toolbox, so that information related to the Key Events (KEs) in the AOP can be used to group chemicals that are expected to act by the same mechanism and hence have the same skin sensitisation potential; b) developed alternative test methods for the KEs, so that ultimately chemicals can be tested for skin sensitisation without the use of animal tests. The development of integrated testing strategies based on the AOP is ongoing. Building on this proof-of-concept, the OECD has launched an AOP development programme with a first batch of AOPs published in 2016. A number of IT tools, which together form an AOP Knowledge Base, are at various stages of development, and support the construction of AOPs and their use in the development of integrated approaches for testing and assessment. Following the publication of the first batch of AOPs, OECD member countries will decide on priorities for their use in supporting the development of tools for regulatory use.


Subject(s)
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/organization & administration , Decision Making , Hazardous Substances/adverse effects , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/standards , Animals , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Environmental Pollutants , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL