Integrated approaches to testing and assessment

Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology

Volumn 856, Issue , 2016, Pages 317-342

  Worth, Andrew P ^a   Patlewicz, Grace ^b,c  

^a JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE   (Italy)

^b DUPONT COMPANY   (United States)

^c U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

Author keywords

Adverse outcome pathway; Chemical safety assessment; Integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA); Integrated testing strategy (ITS); Predictive toxicology

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTER MODEL; DECISION MAKING; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTEGRATED APPROACHES TO TESTING AND ASSESSMENT; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NONHUMAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN IRRITATION; SKIN SENSITIZATION; TOXICITY TESTING; TOXICOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; TOXICOLOGY; VALIDATION STUDY; ANIMAL; BIOLOGY; DRUG EFFECTS; PROCEDURES; SKIN;

ANIMALS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; HUMANS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SKIN; TOXICITY TESTS; VALIDATION STUDIES AS TOPIC;

EID: 84988934809     PISSN: 00652598     EISSN: 22148019     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-33826-2_13     Document Type: Chapter

References (89)

1. Ahlers J, Stock F, Werschkun B (2008) Integrated testing and intelligent assessment-new challenges under REACH. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 15:565-572
2. Aptula AO, Roberts DW (2006) Mechanistic applicability domains for nonanimal-based prediction of toxicological end points: general principles and application to reactive toxicity. Chem Res Toxicol 19:1097-1105
3. Aptula AO, Patlewicz G, Roberts DW, Schultz TW (2006) Non-enzymatic glutathione reactivity and in vitro toxicity: a non-animal approach to skin sensitization. Toxicol In Vitro 20:239-247
4. Becker RA, Simon T, Patlewicz G, Kennedy SW, Farhat A, Budinsky R (2014) Improving the development of adverse outcome pathways: lessons learned from the AhR Rodent Liver Tumorand AhR Avian Teratogenicity/Embryolethality AOPs. Presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Society of Toxicology, 23-27 March, 2014
5. Bhattacharya S, Shoda LKM, Zhang Q et al (2012) Modeling drug-and chemical-induced hepatotoxicity with systems biology approaches. Front Physiol 3:462
6. Blaauboer BJ (2010) Biokinetic modeling and in vitro-in vivo extrapolations. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 13:242-252
7. Blaauboer BJ, Balls M, Bianchi V et al (1994) The ECITTS integrated toxicity testing scheme: the application of in vitro test systems to the hazard assessment of chemicals. Toxicol In Vitro 8:845-856
8. Blaauboer B, Barratt MD, Houston JB (1999) The integrated use of alternative methods in toxicological risk evaluation. ECVAM integrated test strategies task force report 1. Altern Lab Anim 27:229-237
9. Buist H, Aldenberg T, Batke M et al (2013) The OSIRIS Weight of Evidence approach: ITS mutagenicity and ITS carcinogenicity. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 67:170-181
10. Clemedson C, Kolman A, Forsby A (2007) The Integrated Acute Systemic Toxicity project (ACuteTox) for the optimisation and validation of alternative in vitro tests. Altern Lab Anim 35:33-38
11. Council of Canadian Academies (2012) Integrating emerging technologies into chemical safety assessment. http://www.scienceadvice.ca/en/assessments/completed/pesticides.aspx
12. Cox LA, Douglas D, Marty S, Rowlands JC, Patlewicz G, Goyak KO, Becker RA (2014) Developing scientific in HTS-derived prediction models for endocrine endpoints: lessons learned from an endocrine case study. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 69:443-450
13. Cramer GM, Ford RA, Hall RL (1978) Estimation of toxic hazard—a decision tree approach. Food Cosmet Toxicol 16:255-276
14. Dejongh J, Forsby A, Houston JB et al (1999) An Integrated Approach to the Prediction of Systemic Toxicity using Computer-based Biokinetic Models and Biological In vitro Test Methods: Overview of a Prevalidation Study Based on the ECITTS Project. Toxicol In Vitro 13:549-554
15. De Wever B, Fuchs HW, Gaca M et al (2012) Implementation challenges for designing integrated in vitro testing strategies (ITS) aiming at reducing and replacing animal experimentation. Toxicol In Vitro 26:526-534
16. Dewhurst I, Renwick AG (2013) Evaluation of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC)— challenges and approaches. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 65:168-177
17. ECHA (2012) Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.7a: Endpoint specific guidance. In: Guidance for the implementation of REACH. Version 2.0. November 2012. http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13632/information_requirements_r7a_en.pdf
18. EFSA (2012) Scientific Opinion on exploring options for providing advice about possible human health risks based on the concept of Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC). EFSA J 10(7):2750, European Food Safety Authority. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/2750.pdf
19. Emter R, Ellis G, Natsch A (2010) Performance of a novel keratinocyte-based reporter cell line to screen skin sensitisers in vitro. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 245:281-290
20. Gabbert S, van Ierland EC (2010) Cost-effectiveness analysis of chemical testing for decisionsupport: how to include animal welfare? Hum Ecol Risk Assess 16(3):603-620
21. Gabbert S, Weikard H-P (2013) Sequential testing of chemicals when costs matter: a value of information approach. Hum Ecol Risk Assess An Int J 19:1067-1088
22. Gajewska M, Worth A, Urani C, Briesen H, Schramm K-W (2014) Application of physiologicallybased toxicokinetic modelling in oral-to-dermal extrapolation of threshold doses of cosmetic ingredients. Toxicol Lett 227:189-202
23. Gerberick GF, Vassallo JD, Bailey RE et al (2004) Development of a peptide reactivity assay for screening contact allergens. Toxicol Sci 81:332-343
24. Gerberick GF, Vassallo JD, Foertsch LM et al (2007) Quantification of chemical peptide reactivity for screening contact allergens: a classification tree model approach. Toxicol Sci 97:417-427
25. Grindon C, Combes R, Cronin MTD et al (2008) Integrated testing strategies for use with respect to the requirements of the EU REACH legislation. Altern Lab Anim 36(Suppl 1):7-27
26. Hartung T, Luechtefeld T, Maertens A, Kleensang A (2013) Integrated testing strategies for safety assessments. ALTEX 30:3-18
27. Hennes EC (2012) An overview of values for the threshold of toxicological concern. Toxicol Lett 211:296-303
28. Hoffmann S, Kinsner-Ovaskainen A, Prieto P et al (2010) Acute oral toxicity: variability, reliability, relevance and interspecies comparison of rodent LD50 data from literature surveyed for the ACuteTox project. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 58:395-407
29. IOM (2010) Evaluation of biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in chronic disease. Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC. ISBN 978-0-309-15129-0
30. Jaworska J, Hoffmann S (2010) Integrated Testing Strategy (ITS)—Opportunities to better use existing data and guide future testing in toxicology. ALTEX 27:231-242
31. Jaworska J, Gabbert S, Aldenberg T (2010) Towards optimization of chemical testing under REACH: a Bayesian network approach to Integrated Testing Strategies. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 57:157-167
32. Jaworska J, Dancik Y, Kern P et al (2013) Bayesian integrated testing strategy to assess skin sensitization potency: from theory to practice. J Appl Toxicol 33:1353-1364
33. Kalkhof H, Herzler M, Stahlmann R, Gundert-Remy U (2012) Threshold of toxicological concern values for non-genotoxic effects in industrial chemicals: re-evaluation of the Cramer classification. Arch Toxicol 86:17-25
34. Kinsner-Ovaskainen A, Akkan Z, Casati S et al (2009) Overcoming barriers to validation of nonanimal partial replacement methods/Integrated Testing Strategies: the report of an EPAAECVAM workshop. Altern Lab Anim 37:437-444
35. Kinsner-Ovaskainen A, Maxwell G, Kreysa J et al (2012) Report of the EPAA-ECVAM workshop on the validation of Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS). Altern Lab Anim 40:175-181
36. Lapenna S, Worth A (2011) Analysis of the Cramer classification scheme for oral systemic toxicity— implications for its implementation in Toxtree. JRC Scientific and Technical Report EUR 24898 EN. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/
37. Marx-Stoelting P et al (2009) A review of the implementation of the embryonic stem cell test (EST). The report and recommendations of an ECVAM_ReProTect Workshop. Altern Lab Anim 37:313-328
38. Maxwell G, MacKay C, Cubberley R et al (2014) Applying the skin sensitisation adverse outcome pathway (AOP) to quantitative risk assessment. Toxicol In Vitro 28:8-12
39. Meek ME, Boobis A, Cote I et al (2014) New developments in the evolution and application of the WHO/IPCS framework on mode of action/species concordance analysis. J Appl Toxicol 34:1-18
40. Munro IC, Ford RA, Kennepohl E, Sprenger JG (1996) Correlation of structural class with noobserved-effect levels: a proposal for establishing a threshold of concern. Food Chem Toxicol 34:829-867
41. Norlen H, Worth AP, Gabbert S (2014) A tutorial for analysing the cost-effectiveness of alternative methods for assessing chemical toxicity: the case of acute oral toxicity prediction. Altern Lab Anim 42:115-127
42. Nukada Y, Miyazawa M, Kazutoshi S et al (2013) Data integration of non-animal tests for the development of a test battery to predict the skin sensitizing potential and potency of chemicals. Toxicol In Vitro 27:609-6188
43. Nel AE, Nasser E, Godwin H et al (2013) A multi-stakeholder perspective on the use of alternative test strategies for nanomaterial safety assessment. ACS Nano. 7:6422-6433
44. NRC (2007) Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy. National Academic Press, Washington, DC. http://www.nap.edu/read/11970/chapter/1
45. OECD (2002) Test No. 404: Acute Dermal Irritation/Corrosion, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4. http://www.oecd.org/env/testguidelines
46. OECD (2007) Guidance document on the validation of (Quantitative) structure-activity relationships [(Q)SAR] models. ENV/JM/MONO(2007)2. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/displaydocumentpdf?cote=env/jm/mono(2007)2&doclanguage=en
47. OECD (2012) The adverse outcome pathway for skin sensitisation initiated by covalent binding to proteins part 1: scientific evidence. Series on Testing and Assessment No. 168. ENV/JM/MONO(2012)10/PART1. http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/seriesontestingandassessmentpublicationsbynumber.htm
48. OECD (2013) Guidance document on developing and assessing adverse outcome pathways.OECD Environment, Health and Safety Publications. Series on Testing and Assessment No. 184. ENV/JM/MONO(2013)6. http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/seriesontestingandassessmentpublicationsbynumber.htm
49. OECD (2014a) Guidance document for describing non-guideline in vitro test methods. Series on Testing and Assessment no.211. ENV/JM/MONO(2014)35. http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/seriesontestingandassessmentpublicationsbynumber.htm
50. OECD (2014b) How to use the Toolbox AOP workflow for Skin Sensitization. http://www.oecd.org/env/ehs/risk-assessment/Tutorial_1_How%20to%20use%20AOP%20for%20Skin%20sensitization_F_28012014.pdf
51. OECD (2015a) Report of the workshop on a Framework for the development and use of Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment. ENV/JM/HA(2015)1
52. OECD (2015b) Test Guideline 442c: in chemico skin sensitisation (Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay DPRA). http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/oecdguidelinesforthetestingofchemicals.htm
53. OECD (2015c) Test Guideline 442d: in vitro skin sensitisation (ARE-Nrf2 luciferase test method). http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/oecdguidelinesforthetestingofchemicals.htm
54. OECD (2016) Guidance Document on the Reporting of Defined Approaches to be used within Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment. ENV/JM/HA(2016)10
55. Oomen AG, Bos PMJ, Fernandes TF et al (2014) Concern-driven integrated approaches to nanomaterial testing and assessment-report of the NanoSafety Cluster Working Group 10. Nanotoxicology 8:334-348
56. Patlewicz G, Simon T, Goyak K et al (2013) Use and validation of HT/HC assays to support 21st century toxicity evaluations. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 65:259-268
57. Patlewicz G, Kuseva C, Kesova A, Popova I, Zhechev T, Pavlov T, Roberts DW, Mekenyan OM (2014) Towards AOP application—implementation of an integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) into a pipeline tool for skin sensitization. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 69:529-545
58. Patlewicz G, Simon TW, Rowlands JC, Budinsky RA, Becker RA (2015) Proposing a scientific confidence framework to help support the application of adverse outcome pathways for regulatory purposes. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 71:463-477
59. Piersma AH, Bosgra S, van Duursen MBM et al (2013) Evaluation of an alternative in vitro test battery for detecting reproductive toxicants. Reprod Toxicol 38:53-64
60. Python F, Goebel C, Aeby P (2007) Assessment of the U937 cell line for the detection of contact allergens. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 220(2):113-124
61. Reif DM, Martin MT, Tan SW et al (2010) Endocrine profiling and prioritization of environmental chemicals using ToxCast data. Environ Health Perspect 118:1714-1720
62. Roberts DW, Patlewicz G (2009) Chemistry based non-animal predictive modeling for skin sensitization. In: Devillers J (ed) Ecotoxicology modeling. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 61-83
63. Roberts DW, Patlewicz GY (2014) Integrated testing and assessment approaches for skin sensitization: a commentary. J Appl Toxicol 34(4):436-440
64. Roberts DW, Aptula AO, Patlewicz G, Pease C (2008) Chemical reactivity indices and mechanismbased read-across for non-animal based assessment of skin sensitisation potential. J Appl Toxicol 28:443-454
65. Rorije E, Aldenberg T, Buist H et al (2013) The OSIRIS Weight of Evidence approach: ITS for skin sensitisation. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 67:146-156
66. Rotroff DM, Dix DJ, Houck KA, Knudsen TB, Martin MT, McLaurin KW, Reif DM, Crofton KM, Singh AV, Xia M, Huang R, Judson RS (2013) Using in vitro high throughput screening assays to identify potential endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Environ Health Perspect 121:7-14
67. Rovida C, Roggen EL (2007) Management of an Integrated Project (Sens-it-iv) to develop in vitro tests to assess sensitisation. Altern Lab Anim 35:317-322
68. Rowbotham AL, Gibson RM (2011) Exposure-driven risk assessment: applying exposure-based waiving of toxicity tests under REACH. Food Chem Toxicol 49:1661-1673
69. Sakaguchi H, Ashikaga T, Kosaka N, Sono S, Nishiyama N, Itagaki H (2007) The in vitro skin sensitization test; human cell line activation test (h-CLAT) using THP-1 cells. Toxicol Letts 172:S93
70. Schaafsma G, Kroese ED, Tielemans EL et al (2009) REACH, non-testing approaches and the urgent need for a change in mind set. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 53:70-80
71. Schultz TW, Yarbrough JW, Johnson EL (2005) Structure-activity relationships for reactivity of carbonyl-containing compounds with glutathione. SAR QSAR Environ Res 16:313-322
72. Stone V, Pozzi-Mucelli S, Tran L et al (2014) ITS-NANO—Prioritising nanosafety research to develop a stakeholder driven intelligent testing strategy. Part Fibre Toxicol 11:9
73. Thomas RS, Black MB, Li L, Healy E, Chu TM, Bao W, Andersen ME, Wolfinger RD (2012) A comprehensive statistical analysis of predicting in vivo hazard using high-throughput in vitro screening. Toxicol Sci 128:398-417
74. Thomas RS, Philbert MA, Auerbach SS et al (2013) Incorporating new technologies into toxicity testing and risk assessment: moving from 21st century vision to a data-driven framework. Toxicol Sci 136:4-18
75. Tluczkiewicz I, Buist HE, Martin MT et al (2011) Improvement of the Cramer classification for oral exposure using the database TTC RepDose—a strategy description. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 61:340-350
76. Tluczkiewicz I, Batke M, Kroese D et al (2013) The OSIRIS Weight of Evidence approach: ITS for the endpoints repeated-dose toxicity (RepDose ITS). Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 67:157-169
77. Tollefsen KE, Scholz S, Cronin MT, Edwards SW, de Knecht J, Crofton K, Garcia-Reyero N, Hartung T, Worth A, Patlewicz G (2014) Applying Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) to support Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA). Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 70:629-640
78. United Nations (2013) Report of the Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods and on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals on its sixth session: amendments to the fourth revised edition of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) (ST/SG/AC.10/30/Rev.4). http://www.unece. org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/doc/2013/dgac10/ST-SG-AC10-40a3e.pdf
79. Van Leeuwen CJ, Patlewicz GY, Worth AP (2007) Intelligent testing strategies. In: van Leeuwen CJ, Vermeire TG (eds) Risk assessment of chemicals. An introduction, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 467-509
80. Vermeire T, van de Bovenkamp M, de Bruin YB et al (2010) Exposure-based waiving under REACH. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 58:408-420
81. Vermeire T, Aldenberg T, Buist H et al (2013) OSIRIS, a quest for proof of principle for integrated testing strategies of chemicals for four human health endpoints. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 67:136-145
82. Willett CE, Bishop PL, Sullivan KM (2011) Application of an integrated testing strategy to the U.S. EPA endocrine disruptor screening program. Toxicol Sci 123:15-25
83. Worth AP (2000) The integrated use of physicochemical and in vitro data for predicting chemical toxicity. PhD thesis, Liverpool John Moores University
84. Worth AP (2004) The tiered approach to toxicity assessment based on the integrated use of alternative (non-animal) tests. In: Cronin MTD, Livingstone D (eds) Predicting chemical toxicity and fate. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 389-410
85. Worth AP (2010) The role of QSAR methodology in the regulatory assessment of chemicals. In: Puzyn T, Leszczynski J, Cronin MTD (eds) Recent advances in QSAR studies: methods and applications. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 367-382
86. Worth AP, Balls M (2001) The importance of the prediction model in the validation of alternative tests. Altern Lab Anim 29:135-144
87. Worth AP, Cronin MT (2001) The use of bootstrap resampling to assess the variability of Draize tissue scores. Altern Lab Anim 29:557-573
88. Worth AP, Fentem JH (1999) A general approach for evaluating stepwise testing strategies. Altern Lab Anim 27:161-177
89. Worth AP, Fentem JH, Balls M, Botham PA, Curren RD, Earl LK, Esdaile DJ, Liebsch M (1998) An evaluation of the proposed OECD testing strategy for skin corrosion. Altern Lab Anim 26:709-720