17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Wind of Change Challenges Toxicological Regulators

      article-commentary

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: In biomedical research, the past two decades have seen the advent of in vitro model systems based on stem cells, humanized cell lines, and engineered organotypic tissues, as well as numerous cellular assays based on primarily established tumor-derived cell lines and their genetically modified derivatives.

          Objective: There are high hopes that these systems might replace the need for animal testing in regulatory toxicology. However, despite increasing pressure in recent years to reduce animal testing, regulators are still reluctant to adopt in vitro approaches on a large scale. It thus seems appropriate to consider how we could realistically perform regulatory toxicity testing using in vitro assays only.

          Discussion and Conclusion: Here, we suggest an in vitro–only approach for regulatory testing that will benefit consumers, industry, and regulators alike.

          Related collections

          Most cited references64

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          In Vitro Screening of Environmental Chemicals for Targeted Testing Prioritization: The ToxCast Project

          Background Chemical toxicity testing is being transformed by advances in biology and computer modeling, concerns over animal use, and the thousands of environmental chemicals lacking toxicity data. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s ToxCast program aims to address these concerns by screening and prioritizing chemicals for potential human toxicity using in vitro assays and in silico approaches. Objectives This project aims to evaluate the use of in vitro assays for understanding the types of molecular and pathway perturbations caused by environmental chemicals and to build initial prioritization models of in vivo toxicity. Methods We tested 309 mostly pesticide active chemicals in 467 assays across nine technologies, including high-throughput cell-free assays and cell-based assays, in multiple human primary cells and cell lines plus rat primary hepatocytes. Both individual and composite scores for effects on genes and pathways were analyzed. Results Chemicals displayed a broad spectrum of activity at the molecular and pathway levels. We saw many expected interactions, including endocrine and xenobiotic metabolism enzyme activity. Chemicals ranged in promiscuity across pathways, from no activity to affecting dozens of pathways. We found a statistically significant inverse association between the number of pathways perturbed by a chemical at low in vitro concentrations and the lowest in vivo dose at which a chemical causes toxicity. We also found associations between a small set of in vitro assays and rodent liver lesion formation. Conclusions This approach promises to provide meaningful data on the thousands of untested environmental chemicals and to guide targeted testing of environmental contaminants.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Toxicology for the twenty-first century.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects-2010.

              The 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive prohibits to put animal-tested cosmetics on the market in Europe after 2013. In that context, the European Commission invited stakeholder bodies (industry, non-governmental organisations, EU Member States, and the Commission's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety) to identify scientific experts in five toxicological areas, i.e. toxicokinetics, repeated dose toxicity, carcinogenicity, skin sensitisation, and reproductive toxicity for which the Directive foresees that the 2013 deadline could be further extended in case alternative and validated methods would not be available in time. The selected experts were asked to analyse the status and prospects of alternative methods and to provide a scientifically sound estimate of the time necessary to achieve full replacement of animal testing. In summary, the experts confirmed that it will take at least another 7-9 years for the replacement of the current in vivo animal tests used for the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients for skin sensitisation. However, the experts were also of the opinion that alternative methods may be able to give hazard information, i.e. to differentiate between sensitisers and non-sensitisers, ahead of 2017. This would, however, not provide the complete picture of what is a safe exposure because the relative potency of a sensitiser would not be known. For toxicokinetics, the timeframe was 5-7 years to develop the models still lacking to predict lung absorption and renal/biliary excretion, and even longer to integrate the methods to fully replace the animal toxicokinetic models. For the systemic toxicological endpoints of repeated dose toxicity, carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity, the time horizon for full replacement could not be estimated.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Environ Health Perspect
                Environ. Health Perspect
                EHP
                Environmental Health Perspectives
                National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
                0091-6765
                1552-9924
                07 August 2012
                November 2012
                : 120
                : 11
                : 1489-1494
                Affiliations
                [1]German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Center for Alternative Methods to Animal Experiments (ZEBET), Berlin, Germany
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to A. Luch, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn Strasse 8–10, 10589 Berlin, Germany. Telephone: 49 30 18412 4538. E-mail: Andreas.Luch@ 123456bfr.bund.de
                Article
                ehp.1104782
                10.1289/ehp.1104782
                3556610
                22871563
                5718cdc2-1dd8-464e-91f3-cdc61d6a9988
                Copyright @ 2012

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 24 November 2011
                : 07 August 2012
                Categories
                Commentary

                Public health
                alternative testing approach,in vitro testing strategy,stem cells,in vivo testing,regulatory acceptance,chemical safety testing,tox-test dummy

                Comments

                Comment on this article