行动呼吁:通过统一的验证和接受框架推进监管毒理学的新方法方法(NAMs)。

IF 3.5 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, LEGAL
G. Ouedraogo , N. Alépée , B. Tan , C.S. Roper
{"title":"行动呼吁:通过统一的验证和接受框架推进监管毒理学的新方法方法(NAMs)。","authors":"G. Ouedraogo ,&nbsp;N. Alépée ,&nbsp;B. Tan ,&nbsp;C.S. Roper","doi":"10.1016/j.yrtph.2025.105904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The transition from traditional animal testing to human-relevant New Approach Methods (NAMs) in regulatory toxicology faces a significant challenge: a lack of standardized validation and acceptance criteria. This review analyses the limitations of animal test reproducibility and highlights the growing body of evidence supporting the improved reliability and relevance of NAMs for predicting human toxicity. Successful case studies of NAMs implementation across diverse industries are examined and existing regulatory perspectives and initiatives are critically evaluated. This analysis reveals a pressing need for a unified, cross-industry approach to NAMs validation, grounded in measurable quality standards and standardisation. A framework is proposed based on clearly defined standards, standardized protocols, and transparent data sharing to accelerate the integration of NAMs into regulatory decision-making, ultimately benefiting human health, animal welfare, and scientific progress. All stakeholders are urged to actively participate in this initiative by contributing their expertise, sharing data and insights, and collaborating on the development and implementation of this crucial use of NAMs in regulatory toxicology.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20852,"journal":{"name":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 105904"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A call to action: Advancing new approach methodologies (NAMs) in regulatory toxicology through a unified framework for validation and acceptance\",\"authors\":\"G. Ouedraogo ,&nbsp;N. Alépée ,&nbsp;B. Tan ,&nbsp;C.S. Roper\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.yrtph.2025.105904\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The transition from traditional animal testing to human-relevant New Approach Methods (NAMs) in regulatory toxicology faces a significant challenge: a lack of standardized validation and acceptance criteria. This review analyses the limitations of animal test reproducibility and highlights the growing body of evidence supporting the improved reliability and relevance of NAMs for predicting human toxicity. Successful case studies of NAMs implementation across diverse industries are examined and existing regulatory perspectives and initiatives are critically evaluated. This analysis reveals a pressing need for a unified, cross-industry approach to NAMs validation, grounded in measurable quality standards and standardisation. A framework is proposed based on clearly defined standards, standardized protocols, and transparent data sharing to accelerate the integration of NAMs into regulatory decision-making, ultimately benefiting human health, animal welfare, and scientific progress. All stakeholders are urged to actively participate in this initiative by contributing their expertise, sharing data and insights, and collaborating on the development and implementation of this crucial use of NAMs in regulatory toxicology.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"162 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105904\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-08\",\"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/S0273230025001345\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230025001345","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

摘要

监管毒理学从传统的动物试验向与人类相关的新方法(NAMs)过渡面临着一个重大挑战:缺乏标准化的验证和接受标准。这篇综述分析了动物试验可重复性的局限性,并强调越来越多的证据支持NAMs预测人类毒性的可靠性和相关性的提高。对不同行业实施NAMs的成功案例进行了研究,并对现有的监管观点和举措进行了批判性评估。这一分析表明,迫切需要一种统一的、跨行业的方法来验证NAMs,以可测量的质量标准和标准化为基础。提出了一个基于明确定义的标准、标准化协议和透明数据共享的框架,以加速将NAMs纳入监管决策,最终有利于人类健康、动物福利和科学进步。敦促所有利益相关者积极参与这一倡议,贡献其专业知识,分享数据和见解,并就NAMs在监管毒理学中的这一重要用途的开发和实施进行合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A call to action: Advancing new approach methodologies (NAMs) in regulatory toxicology through a unified framework for validation and acceptance
The transition from traditional animal testing to human-relevant New Approach Methods (NAMs) in regulatory toxicology faces a significant challenge: a lack of standardized validation and acceptance criteria. This review analyses the limitations of animal test reproducibility and highlights the growing body of evidence supporting the improved reliability and relevance of NAMs for predicting human toxicity. Successful case studies of NAMs implementation across diverse industries are examined and existing regulatory perspectives and initiatives are critically evaluated. This analysis reveals a pressing need for a unified, cross-industry approach to NAMs validation, grounded in measurable quality standards and standardisation. A framework is proposed based on clearly defined standards, standardized protocols, and transparent data sharing to accelerate the integration of NAMs into regulatory decision-making, ultimately benefiting human health, animal welfare, and scientific progress. All stakeholders are urged to actively participate in this initiative by contributing their expertise, sharing data and insights, and collaborating on the development and implementation of this crucial use of NAMs in regulatory toxicology.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
8.80%
发文量
147
审稿时长
58 days
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)
×
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