Christina H.J. Veltman , Leo T.M. van der Ven , Elena Menegola , Mirjam Luijten
{"title":"A pragmatic workflow for human relevance assessment of toxicological pathways and associated new approach methodologies","authors":"Christina H.J. Veltman , Leo T.M. van der Ven , Elena Menegola , Mirjam Luijten","doi":"10.1016/j.yrtph.2025.105828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Currently, safety assessments of chemical substances are predominantly based on animal data. Multiple considerations call for the use of alternative testing strategies that are based on new approach methodologies (NAMs). However, the human relevance of these testing strategies is usually uncertain. This necessitates a harmonized and accepted workflow for assessing their applicability for regulatory purposes. This report proposes such a workflow, applicable for assessing the human relevance of a toxicological pathway and the relevance of NAMs related to the different components of the pathway. The workflow starts with an established toxicological pathway, of which the adverse outcome is relevant for human health risk assessment and that has sufficient weight of evidence. Human relevance is assessed through three main questions, related to the different components (steps) of the pathway, the pathology of human syndromes that have a similar adverse outcome, and quantitative aspects. The latter comprise both interspecies differences and <em>in vitro</em> – <em>in vivo</em> differences. The combined evidence is scored as ‘strong’, ‘moderate’ or ‘weak’ support of human relevance, based on expert judgement. The workflow developed was tested in a case study, through application to an AOP describing craniofacial malformations after <em>in utero</em> exposure to triazoles. Based on evidence collected for two of the three main questions, the case study provided moderate to strong support for human relevance of both the various components of the AOP and its associated NAMs. Furthermore, it demonstrated that the workflow is a promising approach that allows for a more transparent scientific evaluation of human relevance of toxicological pathways and associated NAMs. Therefore, despite some areas for improvement, we consider the workflow an important step forward for application of AOPs and related NAMs in human health risk assessment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20852,"journal":{"name":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","volume":"160 ","pages":"Article 105828"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230025000583","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Currently, safety assessments of chemical substances are predominantly based on animal data. Multiple considerations call for the use of alternative testing strategies that are based on new approach methodologies (NAMs). However, the human relevance of these testing strategies is usually uncertain. This necessitates a harmonized and accepted workflow for assessing their applicability for regulatory purposes. This report proposes such a workflow, applicable for assessing the human relevance of a toxicological pathway and the relevance of NAMs related to the different components of the pathway. The workflow starts with an established toxicological pathway, of which the adverse outcome is relevant for human health risk assessment and that has sufficient weight of evidence. Human relevance is assessed through three main questions, related to the different components (steps) of the pathway, the pathology of human syndromes that have a similar adverse outcome, and quantitative aspects. The latter comprise both interspecies differences and in vitro – in vivo differences. The combined evidence is scored as ‘strong’, ‘moderate’ or ‘weak’ support of human relevance, based on expert judgement. The workflow developed was tested in a case study, through application to an AOP describing craniofacial malformations after in utero exposure to triazoles. Based on evidence collected for two of the three main questions, the case study provided moderate to strong support for human relevance of both the various components of the AOP and its associated NAMs. Furthermore, it demonstrated that the workflow is a promising approach that allows for a more transparent scientific evaluation of human relevance of toxicological pathways and associated NAMs. Therefore, despite some areas for improvement, we consider the workflow an important step forward for application of AOPs and related NAMs in human health risk assessment.
期刊介绍:
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology publishes peer reviewed articles that involve the generation, evaluation, and interpretation of experimental animal and human data that are of direct importance and relevance for regulatory authorities with respect to toxicological and pharmacological regulations in society. All peer-reviewed articles that are published should be devoted to improve the protection of human health and environment. Reviews and discussions are welcomed that address legal and/or regulatory decisions with respect to risk assessment and management of toxicological and pharmacological compounds on a scientific basis. It addresses an international readership of scientists, risk assessors and managers, and other professionals active in the field of human and environmental health.
Types of peer-reviewed articles published:
-Original research articles of relevance for regulatory aspects covering aspects including, but not limited to:
1.Factors influencing human sensitivity
2.Exposure science related to risk assessment
3.Alternative toxicological test methods
4.Frameworks for evaluation and integration of data in regulatory evaluations
5.Harmonization across regulatory agencies
6.Read-across methods and evaluations
-Contemporary Reviews on policy related Research issues
-Letters to the Editor
-Guest Editorials (by Invitation)