Estimation of Benchmark Dose Ratio Distributions for Subchronic-to-Chronic Extrapolation Using Meta-Analysis.

IF 4.1 3区 医学 Q2 TOXICOLOGY
Todd Blessinger, John Fox, Jeffry Dean
{"title":"Estimation of Benchmark Dose Ratio Distributions for Subchronic-to-Chronic Extrapolation Using Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Todd Blessinger, John Fox, Jeffry Dean","doi":"10.1093/toxsci/kfaf119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recently, the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) developed a unified probabilistic framework for deriving reference values, and a software tool, Approximate Probabilistic Analysis (APROBA), to help implement this framework. The distributions of multiple sources of uncertainty and variability were estimated, including uncertainty when extrapolating from subchronic to chronic data. The subchronic-to-chronic distribution was estimated using ratios between subchronic and chronic benchmark doses (BMD) and was determined to be approximately lognormal, with parameter values reported by IPCS. These parameters were estimated largely from historical data on body and organ weights from toxicological studies. We estimated the distribution using a larger collection of data, including histopathological and clinical endpoints. Our analysis determined that key assumptions of the method and the default values in APROBA are consistent with the results from the new data. However, the uncertainty of predictions for dichotomous response data was greater than assumed in APROBA, and the reference values derived using our new results were lower than those derived from APROBA (by 25% in an example case). Also, APROBA's default parameter values do not account fully for the uncertainty of predicted chronic BMDs. Most importantly, uncertainty of the prediction can be much greater than assumed in APROBA if BMDs are accepted when they fall well outside the observed dose range or when an upper confidence limit is not quantifiable. Careful evaluation of dose-response model fit, including a number of indicators of model suitability in addition to standard goodness-of-fit statistics, is necessary to improve quantification of uncertainty.</p>","PeriodicalId":23178,"journal":{"name":"Toxicological Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfaf119","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recently, the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) developed a unified probabilistic framework for deriving reference values, and a software tool, Approximate Probabilistic Analysis (APROBA), to help implement this framework. The distributions of multiple sources of uncertainty and variability were estimated, including uncertainty when extrapolating from subchronic to chronic data. The subchronic-to-chronic distribution was estimated using ratios between subchronic and chronic benchmark doses (BMD) and was determined to be approximately lognormal, with parameter values reported by IPCS. These parameters were estimated largely from historical data on body and organ weights from toxicological studies. We estimated the distribution using a larger collection of data, including histopathological and clinical endpoints. Our analysis determined that key assumptions of the method and the default values in APROBA are consistent with the results from the new data. However, the uncertainty of predictions for dichotomous response data was greater than assumed in APROBA, and the reference values derived using our new results were lower than those derived from APROBA (by 25% in an example case). Also, APROBA's default parameter values do not account fully for the uncertainty of predicted chronic BMDs. Most importantly, uncertainty of the prediction can be much greater than assumed in APROBA if BMDs are accepted when they fall well outside the observed dose range or when an upper confidence limit is not quantifiable. Careful evaluation of dose-response model fit, including a number of indicators of model suitability in addition to standard goodness-of-fit statistics, is necessary to improve quantification of uncertainty.

用荟萃分析估计亚慢性到慢性外推的基准剂量比分布。
最近,国际化学品安全方案(化学品安全方案)制定了一个统一的概率框架,用于推导参考值,并开发了一个软件工具,近似概率分析(approba),以帮助实施这一框架。估计了多种不确定性和变异性来源的分布,包括从亚慢性数据外推到慢性数据时的不确定性。使用亚慢性和慢性基准剂量(BMD)之间的比率估计亚慢性到慢性的分布,并确定为近似对数正态分布,参数值由IPCS报告。这些参数主要是根据毒理学研究中关于身体和器官重量的历史数据估计的。我们使用更大的数据集来估计分布,包括组织病理学和临床终点。我们的分析确定该方法的关键假设和approba中的默认值与新数据的结果一致。然而,二分类反应数据预测的不确定性比在APROBA中假设的要大,并且使用我们的新结果得到的参考值比在APROBA中得到的参考值低(在一个例子中降低了25%)。此外,approba的默认参数值并不能完全解释预测慢性bmd的不确定性。最重要的是,如果bmd远远超出所观察到的剂量范围或当置信上限无法量化时被接受,则预测的不确定性可能比在approba中假设的要大得多。仔细评估剂量-反应模型拟合,除了标准拟合优度统计外,还包括一些模型适宜性指标,这对于改进不确定性的量化是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Toxicological Sciences
Toxicological Sciences 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
7.90%
发文量
118
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: The mission of Toxicological Sciences, the official journal of the Society of Toxicology, is to publish a broad spectrum of impactful research in the field of toxicology. The primary focus of Toxicological Sciences is on original research articles. The journal also provides expert insight via contemporary and systematic reviews, as well as forum articles and editorial content that addresses important topics in the field. The scope of Toxicological Sciences is focused on a broad spectrum of impactful toxicological research that will advance the multidisciplinary field of toxicology ranging from basic research to model development and application, and decision making. Submissions will include diverse technologies and approaches including, but not limited to: bioinformatics and computational biology, biochemistry, exposure science, histopathology, mass spectrometry, molecular biology, population-based sciences, tissue and cell-based systems, and whole-animal studies. Integrative approaches that combine realistic exposure scenarios with impactful analyses that move the field forward are encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信