Why adverse outcome pathways need to be FAIR.

Adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) provide evidence for demonstrating and assessing causality between measurable toxicological mechanisms and human or environmental adverse effects. AOPs have gained increasing attention over the past decade and are believed to provide the necessary steppingstone for more effective risk assessment of chemicals and materials and moving beyond the need for animal testing. However, as with all types of data and knowledge today, AOPs need to be reusable by machines, i.e., machine-actionable, in order to reach their full impact potential. Machine-actionability is supported by the FAIR principles, which guide findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability of data and knowledge. Here, we describe why AOPs need to be FAIR and touch on aspects such as the improved visibility and the increased trust that FAIRification of AOPs provides.

New approach methodologies (NAMs) can detect biological phenomena that occur before they add up to serious problems like cancer, infertility, death, and others. NAMs detect key events (KE) along well-proven and agreed adverse outcome pathways (AOP). If a substance tests positive in a NAM for an upstream KE, this signals an early warning that actual adversity might follow. However, what if the knowledge about these AOPs is a well-kept secret? And what if decision-makers find AOPs too exotic to apply in risk assessment? This is where FAIR comes in! FAIR stands for making information findable, accessible, interoperable and re-useable. It aims to increase availability, usefulness, and trustworthiness of data. Here, we show that by interpreting the FAIR principles beyond a purely technical level, AOPs can ring in a new era of 3Rs applicability ‒ by increasing their visibility and making their creation process more transparent and reproducible.

Beyond chemicals: Opportunities and challenges of integrating non-chemical stressors in adverse outcome pathways.

The adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) were developed to accelerate evidence-based chemical risk assessment by leveraging data from new approach methodologies. Thanks to their stressor-agnostic approach, AOPs were seen as instrumental in other fields. Here, we present AOPs that report non-chemical stressors along with the challenges encountered for their development. Challenges regarding AOPs linked to nanomaterials include non-specific molecular initiating events, limited understanding of nanomaterial biodistribution, and needs for adaptations of the in silico modeling and testing systems. Development of AOPs for radiation face challenges in how to incorporate ionizing events type, dose rate, energy deposition, and how to account for targeting multiple macromolecules. AOPs for COVID-19 required the inclusion of SARS-CoV-2-specific replicative steps to capture the essential events driving the disease. Developing AOPs to evaluate efficacy and toxicity of cell therapies necessitates addressing the cellular nature and the therapeutic function of the stressor. Finally, addressing toxicity of emerging biological stressors like microbial pesticides can learn from COVID-19 AOPs. We further discuss that the adaptations needed to expand AOP applicability beyond chemicals are mainly at the molecular and cellular levels while downstream key events at tissue or organ level, such as inflammation, are shared by many AOPs initiated by various stressors. In conclusion, although it is challenging to integrate non-chemical stressors within AOPs, this expands opportunities to account for real-world scenarios, to identify vulnerable individuals, and to bridge knowledge on mechanisms of adversity.

The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) framework was developed to help predict whether chemicals have toxic effects on humans. Structuring available information in an accessible database can reduce animal testing. AOPs usually capture the path from the interaction of a stressor, usually a chemical, with the human body to an adverse outcome, e.g., a disease symptom. The concept of AOPs has now been expanded to include non-chemical stressors such as nanomaterials, radiation, viruses, cells used to treat patients, and microorganisms employed as pesticides. We use discuss how these stressors need to be accommodated within the framework and point out that pathways initiated by these stressors share downstream events like inflammation with chemical stressors. By integrating non-chemical stressors into the framework, real-world scenarios where people may be exposed to different stressor types can be considered, vulnerable individuals can be identified, and knowledge on toxic effects can be compounded.

CIAO: a living experiment in interdisciplinary large-scale collaboration facilitated by the Adverse Outcome Pathway framework.

Introduction: The CIAO project was launched in Spring 2020 to address the need to make sense of the numerous and disparate data available on COVID-19 pathogenesis. Based on a crowdsourcing model of large-scale collaboration, the project has exploited the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) knowledge management framework built to support chemical risk assessment driven by mechanistic understanding of the biological perturbations at the different organizational levels. Hence the AOPs might have real potential to integrate data produced through different approaches and from different disciplines as experienced in the context of COVID-19. In this study, we aim to address the effectiveness of the AOP framework (i) in supporting an interdisciplinary collaboration for a viral disease and (ii) in working as the conceptual mediator of a crowdsourcing model of collaboration. Methods: We used a survey disseminated among the CIAO participants, a workshop open to all interested CIAO contributors, a series of interviews with some participants and a self-reflection on the processes. Results: The project has supported genuine interdisciplinarity with exchange of knowledge. The framework provided a common reference point for discussion and collaboration. The diagram used in the AOPs assisted with making explicit what are the different perspectives brought to the knowledge about the pathways. The AOP-Wiki showed up many aspects about its usability for those not already in the world of AOPs. Meanwhile their use in CIAO highlighted needed adaptations. Introduction of new Wiki elements for modulating factors was potentially the most disruptive one. Regarding how well AOPs support a crowdsourcing model of large-scale collaboration, the CIAO project showed that this is successful when there is a strong central organizational impetus and when clarity about the terms of the collaboration is brought as early as possible. Discussion: Extrapolate the successful CIAO approach and related processes to other areas of science where the AOP could foster interdisciplinary and systematic organization of the knowledge is an exciting perspective.

OECD harmonised template 201: Structuring and reporting mechanistic information to foster the integration of new approach methodologies for hazard and risk assessment of chemicals.

In the European Union, the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability (CSS) highlights the need to enhance the identification and assessment of substances of concern while reducing animal testing, thus fostering the development and use of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) such as in silico, in vitro and in chemico. In the United States, the Tox21 strategy aims at shifting toxicological assessments away from traditional animal studies towards target-specific, mechanism-based and biological observations mainly obtained by using NAMs. Many other jurisdictions around the world are also increasing the use of NAMs. Hence, the provision of dedicated non-animal toxicological data and reporting formats as a basis for chemical risk assessment is necessary. Harmonising data reporting is crucial when aiming at re-using and sharing data for chemical risk assessment across jurisdictions. The OECD has developed a series of OECD Harmonised Templates (OHT), which are standard data formats designed for reporting information used for the risk assessment of chemicals relevant to their intrinsic properties, including effects on human health (e.g., toxicokinetics, skin sensitisation, repeated dose toxicity) and the environment (e.g., toxicity to test species and wildlife, biodegradation in soil, metabolism of residues in crops). The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the applicability of the OHT standard format for reporting information under various chemical risk assessment regimes, and to provide users with practical guidance on the use of OHT 201, in particular to report test results on intermediate effects and mechanistic information.

Application of AOPs to assist regulatory assessment of chemical risks - Case studies, needs and recommendations.

While human regulatory risk assessment (RA) still largely relies on animal studies, new approach methodologies (NAMs) based on in vitro, in silico or non-mammalian alternative models are increasingly used to evaluate chemical hazards. Moreover, human epidemiological studies with biomarkers of effect (BoE) also play an invaluable role in identifying health effects associated with chemical exposures. To move towards the next generation risk assessment (NGRA), it is therefore crucial to establish bridges between NAMs and standard approaches, and to establish processes for increasing mechanistically-based biological plausibility in human studies. The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework constitutes an important tool to address these needs but, despite a significant increase in knowledge and awareness, the use of AOPs in chemical RA remains limited. The objective of this paper is to address issues related to using AOPs in a regulatory context from various perspectives as it was discussed in a workshop organized within the European Union partnerships HBM4EU and PARC in spring 2022. The paper presents examples where the AOP framework has been proven useful for the human RA process, particularly in hazard prioritization and characterization, in integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA), and in the identification and validation of BoE in epidemiological studies. Nevertheless, several limitations were identified that hinder the optimal usability and acceptance of AOPs by the regulatory community including the lack of quantitative information on response-response relationships and of efficient ways to map chemical data (exposure and toxicity) onto AOPs. The paper summarizes suggestions, ongoing initiatives and third-party tools that may help to overcome these obstacles and thus assure better implementation of AOPs in the NGRA.

The Adverse Outcome Pathway Framework Applied to Neurological Symptoms of COVID-19.

Several reports have shown that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has the potential to also be neurotropic. However, the mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 induces neurologic injury, including neurological and/or psychological symptoms, remain unclear. In this review, the available knowledge on the neurobiological mechanisms underlying COVID-19 was organized using the AOP framework. Four AOPs leading to neurological adverse outcomes (AO), anosmia, encephalitis, stroke, and seizure, were developed. Biological key events (KEs) identified to induce these AOs included binding to ACE2, blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption, hypoxia, neuroinflammation, and oxidative stress. The modularity of AOPs allows the construction of AOP networks to visualize core pathways and recognize neuroinflammation and BBB disruption as shared mechanisms. Furthermore, the impact on the neurological AOPs of COVID-19 by modulating and multiscale factors such as age, psychological stress, nutrition, poverty, and food insecurity was discussed. Organizing the existing knowledge along an AOP framework can represent a valuable tool to understand disease mechanisms and identify data gaps and potentially contribute to treatment, and prevention. This AOP-aligned approach also facilitates synergy between experts from different backgrounds, while the fast-evolving and disruptive nature of COVID-19 emphasizes the need for interdisciplinarity and cross-community research.

Towards a qAOP framework for predictive toxicology - Linking data to decisions.

The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) is a conceptual construct that facilitates organisation and interpretation of mechanistic data representing multiple biological levels and deriving from a range of methodological approaches including in silico, in vitro and in vivo assays. AOPs are playing an increasingly important role in the chemical safety assessment paradigm and quantification of AOPs is an important step towards a more reliable prediction of chemically induced adverse effects. Modelling methodologies require the identification, extraction and use of reliable data and information to support the inclusion of quantitative considerations in AOP development. An extensive and growing range of digital resources are available to support the modelling of quantitative AOPs, providing a wide range of information, but also requiring guidance for their practical application. A framework for qAOP development is proposed based on feedback from a group of experts and three qAOP case studies. The proposed framework provides a harmonised approach for both regulators and scientists working in this area.

Systematic Organization of COVID-19 Data Supported by the Adverse Outcome Pathway Framework.

Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOP) provide structured frameworks for the systematic organization of research data and knowledge. The AOP framework follows a set of key principles that allow for broad application across diverse disciplines related to human health, including toxicology, pharmacology, virology and medical research. The COVID-19 pandemic engages a great number of scientists world-wide and data is increasing with exponential speed. Diligent data management strategies are employed but approaches for systematically organizing the data-derived information and knowledge are lacking. We believe AOPs can play an important role in improving interpretation and efficient application of scientific understanding of COVID-19. Here, we outline a newly initiated effort, the CIAO project (https://www.ciao-covid.net/), to streamline collaboration between scientists across the world toward development of AOPs for COVID-19, and describe the overarching aims of the effort, as well as the expected outcomes and research support that they will provide.

Understanding COVID-19 through adverse outcome pathways - 2nd CIAO AOP Design Workshop.

The CIAO project (Modelling the Pathogenesis of COVID-19 using the Adverse Outcome Pathway framework) aims at a holistic assembly of knowledge to deliver a truly transdisciplinary description of the entire COVID-19 physiopathology starting with the initial contact with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and ending with one or several adverse outcomes, e.g., respiratory failure. On 27-28 January 2021, a group of 50+ scientists from numerous organizations around the world met in the 2nd CIAO AOP Design Workshop to discuss the depiction of the COVID-19 disease process as a series of key events (KEs) in a network of AOPs. During the workshop, 74 such KEs forming 13 AOPs were identified, covering COVID-19 manifestations that affect the respiratory, neurological, liver, cardiovascular, kidney and gastrointestinal systems. Modulating factors influencing the course and severity of the disease were also addressed, as was a possible extension of the investigations beyond purely biological phenomena. The workshop ended with the creation of seven working groups, which will further elaborate on the AOPs to be presented and discussed in the 3rd CIAO workshop on 28-29 April 2021.

Alzheimer's Disease, and Breast and Prostate Cancer Research: Translational Failures and the Importance to Monitor Outputs and Impact of Funded Research.

Dementia and cancer are becoming increasingly prevalent in Western countries. In the last two decades, research focused on Alzheimer's disease (AD) and cancer, in particular, breast cancer (BC) and prostate cancer (PC), has been substantially funded both in Europe and worldwide. While scientific research outcomes have contributed to increase our understanding of the disease etiopathology, still the prevalence of these chronic degenerative conditions remains very high across the globe. By definition, no model is perfect. In particular, animal models of AD, BC, and PC have been and still are traditionally used in basic/fundamental, translational, and preclinical research to study human disease mechanisms, identify new therapeutic targets, and develop new drugs. However, animals do not adequately model some essential features of human disease; therefore, they are often unable to pave the way to the development of drugs effective in human patients. The rise of new technological tools and models in life science, and the increasing need for multidisciplinary approaches have encouraged many interdisciplinary research initiatives. With considerable funds being invested in biomedical research, it is becoming pivotal to define and apply indicators to monitor the contribution to innovation and impact of funded research. Here, we discuss some of the issues underlying translational failure in AD, BC, and PC research, and describe how indicators could be applied to retrospectively measure outputs and impact of funded biomedical research.

Artificial Intelligence for chemical risk assessment.

As the basis for managing the risks of chemical exposure, the Chemical Risk Assessment (CRA) process can impact a substantial part of the economy, the health of hundreds of millions of people, and the condition of the environment. However, the number of properly assessed chemicals falls short of societal needs due to a lack of experts for evaluation, interference of third party interests, and the sheer volume of potentially relevant information on the chemicals from disparate sources. In order to explore ways in which computational methods may help overcome this discrepancy between the number of chemical risk assessments required on the one hand and the number and adequateness of assessments actually being conducted on the other, the European Commission's Joint Research Centre organised a workshop on Artificial Intelligence for Chemical Risk Assessment (AI4CRA). The workshop identified a number of areas where Artificial Intelligence could potentially increase the number and quality of regulatory risk management decisions based on CRA, involving process simulation, supporting evaluation, identifying problems, facilitating collaboration, finding experts, evidence gathering, systematic review, knowledge discovery, and building cognitive models. Although these are interconnected, they are organised and discussed under two main themes: scientific-technical process and social aspects and the decision making process.

Searching Online Chemical Data Repositories via the ChemAgora Portal.

ChemAgora, a web application designed and developed in the context of the "Data Infrastructure for Chemical Safety Assessment" (diXa) project, provides search capabilities to chemical data from resources available online, enabling users to cross-reference their search results with both regulatory chemical information and public chemical databases. ChemAgora, through an on-the-fly search, informs whether a chemical is known or not in each of the external data sources and provides clikable links leading to the third-party web site pages containing the information. The original purpose of the ChemAgora application was to correlate studies stored in the diXa data warehouse with available chemical data. Since the end of the diXa project, ChemAgora has evolved into an independent portal, currently accessible directly through the ChemAgora home page, with improved search capabilities of online data sources.

Creating a Structured AOP Knowledgebase via Ontology-Based Annotations.

INTRODUCTION: The Adverse Outcome Pathway framework is increasingly used to integrate data generated based on traditional and emerging toxicity testing paradigms. As the number of AOP descriptions has increased, so has the need to define the AOP in computable terms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Herein, we present a comprehensive annotation of 172 AOPs housed in the AOP-Wiki as of December 4, 2016 using terms from existing biological ontologies. RESULTS: AOP Key Events (KEs) were assigned ontology terms using a concept called the Event Component, which consists of a Process, an Object, and an Action term, with each term originating from ontologies and other controlled vocabularies. Annotation of KEs with ontology classes from fourteen ontologies and controlled vocabularies resulted in a total of 685 KEs being annotated with a total of 809 Event Components. A set of seven conventions resulted, defining the annotation of KEs via Event Components. DISCUSSION: This expanded annotation of AOPs allows computational reasoners to aid in both AOP development and applications. In addition, the incorporation of explicit biological objects will reduce the time required for converting a qualitative AOP description into a conceptual model that can support computational modeling. As high throughput genomics becomes a more important part of the high throughput toxicity testing landscape, the new approaches described here for annotating key events will also promote the visualization and analysis of genomics data in an AOP context.

How Adverse Outcome Pathways Can Aid the Development and Use of Computational Prediction Models for Regulatory Toxicology.

Efforts are underway to transform regulatory toxicology and chemical safety assessment from a largely empirical science based on direct observation of apical toxicity outcomes in whole organism toxicity tests to a predictive one in which outcomes and risk are inferred from accumulated mechanistic understanding. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) framework provides a systematic approach for organizing knowledge that may support such inference. Likewise, computational models of biological systems at various scales provide another means and platform to integrate current biological understanding to facilitate inference and extrapolation. We argue that the systematic organization of knowledge into AOP frameworks can inform and help direct the design and development of computational prediction models that can further enhance the utility of mechanistic and in silico data for chemical safety assessment. This concept was explored as part of a workshop on AOP-Informed Predictive Modeling Approaches for Regulatory Toxicology held September 24-25, 2015. Examples of AOP-informed model development and its application to the assessment of chemicals for skin sensitization and multiple modes of endocrine disruption are provided. The role of problem formulation, not only as a critical phase of risk assessment, but also as guide for both AOP and complementary model development is described. Finally, a proposal for actively engaging the modeling community in AOP-informed computational model development is made. The contents serve as a vision for how AOPs can be leveraged to facilitate development of computational prediction models needed to support the next generation of chemical safety assessment.

diXa: a data infrastructure for chemical safety assessment.

MOTIVATION: The field of toxicogenomics (the application of '-omics' technologies to risk assessment of compound toxicities) has expanded in the last decade, partly driven by new legislation, aimed at reducing animal testing in chemical risk assessment but mainly as a result of a paradigm change in toxicology towards the use and integration of genome wide data. Many research groups worldwide have generated large amounts of such toxicogenomics data. However, there is no centralized repository for archiving and making these data and associated tools for their analysis easily available. RESULTS: The Data Infrastructure for Chemical Safety Assessment (diXa) is a robust and sustainable infrastructure storing toxicogenomics data. A central data warehouse is connected to a portal with links to chemical information and molecular and phenotype data. diXa is publicly available through a user-friendly web interface. New data can be readily deposited into diXa using guidelines and templates available online. Analysis descriptions and tools for interrogating the data are available via the diXa portal. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: http://www.dixa-fp7.eu CONTACT: d.hendrickx@maastrichtuniversity.nl; info@dixa-fp7.eu SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Pathways of Toxicity.

Despite wide-spread consensus on the need to transform toxicology and risk assessment in order to keep pace with technological and computational changes that have revolutionized the life sciences, there remains much work to be done to achieve the vision of toxicology based on a mechanistic foundation. To this end, a workshop was organized to explore one key aspect of this transformation - the development of Pathways of Toxicity as a key tool for hazard identification based on systems biology. Several issues were discussed in depth in the workshop: The first was the challenge of formally defining the concept of a Pathway of Toxicity (PoT), as distinct from, but complementary to, other toxicological pathway concepts such as mode of action (MoA). The workshop came up with a preliminary definition of PoT as "A molecular definition of cellular processes shown to mediate adverse outcomes of toxicants". It is further recognized that normal physiological pathways exist that maintain homeostasis and these, sufficiently perturbed, can become PoT. Second, the workshop sought to define the adequate public and commercial resources for PoT information, including data, visualization, analyses, tools, and use-cases, as well as the kinds of efforts that will be necessary to enable the creation of such a resource. Third, the workshop explored ways in which systems biology approaches could inform pathway annotation, and which resources are needed and available that can provide relevant PoT information to the diverse user communities.