Causality analysis of toxicological mechanisms in networked systems such as adverse outcome pathway networks

IF 10.9 2区 医学 Q1 TOXICOLOGY
Thomas Hartung, Karolina Kopańska, Alexandra Maertens, Paul Whaley, Sebastian Hoffmann
{"title":"Causality analysis of toxicological mechanisms in networked systems such as adverse outcome pathway networks","authors":"Thomas Hartung,&nbsp;Karolina Kopańska,&nbsp;Alexandra Maertens,&nbsp;Paul Whaley,&nbsp;Sebastian Hoffmann","doi":"10.1007/s00204-026-04386-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper examines why robust causality assessment is central to toxicology yet increasingly difficult in networked biological systems, including Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) networks and multi-omics datasets. Classical causal frameworks (e.g., Koch/Dale reasoning and Bradford Hill-type considerations) remain useful for scoping, but they offer limited operational guidance for multifactorial, nonlinear, and feedback-dominated mechanisms. We therefore synthesize a modern toolbox for causality analysis in toxicology spanning directed acyclic graphs for explicit causal assumptions, quantitative and probabilistic approaches for integrating evidence across key events, and network/<i>dynamical</i> methods that help identify influential hubs and points of vulnerability in AOP networks. Building on evidence-based toxicology, we propose an operational workflow that links (i) structured scoping and model specification, (ii) protocolized evidence retrieval across in vivo, in vitro, in silico and human data streams, (iii) risk-of-bias appraisal and quantitative synthesis of effect sizes and dose–response, (iv) mechanistic integration and targeted perturbation assays, and (v) translation via dual-strand certainty rating (mechanistic vs difference-making evidence) and Evidence-to-Decision tables. We discuss how explainable AI can support scalable integration and transparency. A worked developmental neurotoxicity example illustrates how this pipeline can support regulatory recommendations while explicitly documenting uncertainty.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8329,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Toxicology","volume":"100 11","pages":"4809 - 4834"},"PeriodicalIF":10.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00204-026-04386-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00204-026-04386-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines why robust causality assessment is central to toxicology yet increasingly difficult in networked biological systems, including Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) networks and multi-omics datasets. Classical causal frameworks (e.g., Koch/Dale reasoning and Bradford Hill-type considerations) remain useful for scoping, but they offer limited operational guidance for multifactorial, nonlinear, and feedback-dominated mechanisms. We therefore synthesize a modern toolbox for causality analysis in toxicology spanning directed acyclic graphs for explicit causal assumptions, quantitative and probabilistic approaches for integrating evidence across key events, and network/dynamical methods that help identify influential hubs and points of vulnerability in AOP networks. Building on evidence-based toxicology, we propose an operational workflow that links (i) structured scoping and model specification, (ii) protocolized evidence retrieval across in vivo, in vitro, in silico and human data streams, (iii) risk-of-bias appraisal and quantitative synthesis of effect sizes and dose–response, (iv) mechanistic integration and targeted perturbation assays, and (v) translation via dual-strand certainty rating (mechanistic vs difference-making evidence) and Evidence-to-Decision tables. We discuss how explainable AI can support scalable integration and transparency. A worked developmental neurotoxicity example illustrates how this pipeline can support regulatory recommendations while explicitly documenting uncertainty.

不良后果通路网络等网络系统毒理学机制的因果分析。
本文探讨了为什么强大的因果关系评估是毒理学的核心,但在网络生物系统中却越来越困难,包括不良后果途径(AOP)网络和多组学数据集。经典的因果框架(例如,Koch/Dale推理和Bradford hill类型的考虑)仍然对范围界定有用,但它们为多因素、非线性和反馈主导的机制提供了有限的操作指导。因此,我们综合了一个现代工具箱,用于毒理学因果分析,包括有向无环图,用于明确的因果假设,用于整合关键事件证据的定量和概率方法,以及有助于识别AOP网络中有影响力的枢纽和脆弱性点的网络/动态方法。在基于证据的毒理学基础上,我们提出了一种操作流程,该流程将(i)结构化范围界定和模型规范,(ii)体内、体外、计算机和人体数据流的程序化证据检索,(iii)效应大小和剂量反应的偏倚风险评估和定量合成,(iv)机制整合和靶向摄动分析,(v)通过双链确定性评级(机械性与差异性证据)和证据到决策表进行翻译。我们讨论了可解释的人工智能如何支持可扩展的集成和透明度。一个有效的发育神经毒性例子说明了该管道如何在明确记录不确定性的同时支持监管建议。
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
Archives of Toxicology
Archives of Toxicology 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
4.90%
发文量
218
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: Archives of Toxicology provides up-to-date information on the latest advances in toxicology. The journal places particular emphasis on studies relating to defined effects of chemicals and mechanisms of toxicity, including toxic activities at the molecular level, in humans and experimental animals. Coverage includes new insights into analysis and toxicokinetics and into forensic toxicology. Review articles of general interest to toxicologists are an additional important feature of the journal.
×
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
小红书