S13-04 Skin sensitization potency assessment: Make full use of NAM data to conduct quantitative risk assessment

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 TOXICOLOGY
A. Natsch
{"title":"S13-04 Skin sensitization potency assessment: Make full use of NAM data to conduct quantitative risk assessment","authors":"A. Natsch","doi":"10.1016/j.toxlet.2025.07.086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Great progress has been made over the last 15 years in the development, validation and regulatory acceptance of New Approach Methods for skin sensitization hazard assessment . However, even in the hazard-assessment driven regulatory landscape of Europe, toxicology remains a quantitative science and determining safe use levels is the cornerstone of any toxicological assessment. Thus in the past years, the focus has shifted to use NAM data in a more granular way and to harness quantitative dose-response data to derive a Point of Departure (PoD) for risk assessment. This requires on the one hand a high-quality set of <em>in vivo</em> reference data and a comprehenisve set of NAM data on the other hand. Thus, a brief summary of recent data curation efforts is given. Different approaches for data integration can then be used to predict a point of departure based on NAM data, and both a deterministic linear regression approach and a probabilistic Bayesian approach have been proposed and submitted to OECD approval. These approaches will be reviewed and compared along with other emerging approaches. Overall similar outcomes with different mathematical approaches are achieved when the same input data are used, and key differences are often in the prediction target and the treatment of missing input data. All these NAM approaches indicate a significant progress in potency assessment and it is now possible to derive a PoD without animal testing. Often the different NAM approaches are even better correlated to each other than to the <em>in vivo</em> data. This can both indicate (i) insufficient coverage of the Adverse Outcome Pathway or (ii) similar gaps in the applicability domain of different methods or (iii) significant residual uncertainty in the <em>in vivo</em> dataset, which cannot be overcome with further NAM development. These different possibilities wil be briefly discussed to give a status for NAMs for skin sensitization potency assessment and an outlook for potential improvements.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23206,"journal":{"name":"Toxicology letters","volume":"411 ","pages":"Page S28"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicology letters","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378427425016698","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

Great progress has been made over the last 15 years in the development, validation and regulatory acceptance of New Approach Methods for skin sensitization hazard assessment . However, even in the hazard-assessment driven regulatory landscape of Europe, toxicology remains a quantitative science and determining safe use levels is the cornerstone of any toxicological assessment. Thus in the past years, the focus has shifted to use NAM data in a more granular way and to harness quantitative dose-response data to derive a Point of Departure (PoD) for risk assessment. This requires on the one hand a high-quality set of in vivo reference data and a comprehenisve set of NAM data on the other hand. Thus, a brief summary of recent data curation efforts is given. Different approaches for data integration can then be used to predict a point of departure based on NAM data, and both a deterministic linear regression approach and a probabilistic Bayesian approach have been proposed and submitted to OECD approval. These approaches will be reviewed and compared along with other emerging approaches. Overall similar outcomes with different mathematical approaches are achieved when the same input data are used, and key differences are often in the prediction target and the treatment of missing input data. All these NAM approaches indicate a significant progress in potency assessment and it is now possible to derive a PoD without animal testing. Often the different NAM approaches are even better correlated to each other than to the in vivo data. This can both indicate (i) insufficient coverage of the Adverse Outcome Pathway or (ii) similar gaps in the applicability domain of different methods or (iii) significant residual uncertainty in the in vivo dataset, which cannot be overcome with further NAM development. These different possibilities wil be briefly discussed to give a status for NAMs for skin sensitization potency assessment and an outlook for potential improvements.
S13-04皮肤致敏效力评估:充分利用NAM数据进行定量风险评估
在过去的15年中,在皮肤致敏危害评估的新方法的开发、验证和监管接受方面取得了巨大进展。然而,即使在危害评估驱动的欧洲监管环境中,毒理学仍然是一门定量科学,确定安全使用水平是任何毒理学评估的基石。因此,在过去几年中,重点已转移到以更细粒度的方式使用不孕症数据,并利用定量剂量-反应数据得出用于风险评估的起点(PoD)。这一方面需要一组高质量的体内参考数据,另一方面需要一组全面的NAM数据。因此,简要总结了最近的数据管理工作。然后可以使用不同的数据整合方法来预测基于不结盟运动数据的起点,已经提出了确定性线性回归方法和概率贝叶斯方法,并已提交经合组织批准。这些方法将与其他新兴方法一起进行审查和比较。当使用相同的输入数据时,使用不同的数学方法可以获得总体上相似的结果,关键的差异通常在于预测目标和对缺失输入数据的处理。所有这些不假性方法都表明在效价评估方面取得了重大进展,现在可以在不进行动物试验的情况下得出PoD。通常,不同的NAM方法彼此之间的相关性甚至比体内数据更好。这既可以表明(i)不良结果途径的覆盖范围不足,也可以表明(ii)不同方法的适用性领域存在类似的差距,或者(iii)体内数据集中存在显著的剩余不确定性,这些不确定性无法通过进一步的不适性发展来克服。我们将简要讨论这些不同的可能性,以给出NAMs用于皮肤致敏效力评估的现状和潜在改进的前景。
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
Toxicology letters
Toxicology letters 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
897
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: An international journal for the rapid publication of novel reports on a range of aspects of toxicology, especially mechanisms of toxicity.
×
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