体外剂量测定变化对支持吸入毒物风险评估的重要性。

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation Pub Date : 2024-01-09 Epub Date: 2023-10-12 DOI:10.14573/altex.2305311
Yvonne C M Staal, Liesbeth Geraets, Barbara Rothen-Rutishauser, Martin J D Clift, Hedwig Braakhuis, Anne S Kienhuis, Peter M J Bos
{"title":"体外剂量测定变化对支持吸入毒物风险评估的重要性。","authors":"Yvonne C M Staal, Liesbeth Geraets, Barbara Rothen-Rutishauser, Martin J D Clift, Hedwig Braakhuis, Anne S Kienhuis, Peter M J Bos","doi":"10.14573/altex.2305311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In vitro methods provide a key opportunity to model human-relevant exposure scenarios for hazard identification of inhaled toxicants. Compared to in vivo tests, in vitro methods have the advantage of assessing effects of inhaled toxicants caused by differences in dosimetry, e.g., variations in con­centration (exposure intensity), exposure duration, and exposure frequency, in an easier way. Variations in dosimetry can be used to obtain information on adverse effects in human-relevant exposure scenarios that can be used for risk assessment. Based on the published literature of exposure approaches using air-liquid interface models of the respiratory tract, supplemented with additional experimental data from the EU H2020 project “PATROLS” and research funded by the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, the advantages and disadvantages of dif­ferent exposure methods and considerations to design an experimental setup are summarized and discussed. As the cell models used are models for the respiratory epithelium, our focus is on the local effects in the airways. In conclusion, in order to generate data from in vitro methods for risk assessment of inhaled toxicants it is recommended that (1) it is considered what information really is needed for hazard or risk assessment; (2) the exposure system that is most suitable for the chemical to be assessed is chosen; (3) a deposited dose that mimics deposition in the human respiratory tract is used, and (4) the post-exposure sampling methodology should be carefully considered and relevant to the testing strategy used.</p>","PeriodicalId":51231,"journal":{"name":"Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation","volume":" ","pages":"91-103"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The importance of variations in in vitro dosimetry to support risk assessment of inhaled toxicants.\",\"authors\":\"Yvonne C M Staal, Liesbeth Geraets, Barbara Rothen-Rutishauser, Martin J D Clift, Hedwig Braakhuis, Anne S Kienhuis, Peter M J Bos\",\"doi\":\"10.14573/altex.2305311\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In vitro methods provide a key opportunity to model human-relevant exposure scenarios for hazard identification of inhaled toxicants. Compared to in vivo tests, in vitro methods have the advantage of assessing effects of inhaled toxicants caused by differences in dosimetry, e.g., variations in con­centration (exposure intensity), exposure duration, and exposure frequency, in an easier way. Variations in dosimetry can be used to obtain information on adverse effects in human-relevant exposure scenarios that can be used for risk assessment. Based on the published literature of exposure approaches using air-liquid interface models of the respiratory tract, supplemented with additional experimental data from the EU H2020 project “PATROLS” and research funded by the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, the advantages and disadvantages of dif­ferent exposure methods and considerations to design an experimental setup are summarized and discussed. As the cell models used are models for the respiratory epithelium, our focus is on the local effects in the airways. In conclusion, in order to generate data from in vitro methods for risk assessment of inhaled toxicants it is recommended that (1) it is considered what information really is needed for hazard or risk assessment; (2) the exposure system that is most suitable for the chemical to be assessed is chosen; (3) a deposited dose that mimics deposition in the human respiratory tract is used, and (4) the post-exposure sampling methodology should be carefully considered and relevant to the testing strategy used.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"91-103\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.2305311\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.2305311","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

体外方法提供了一个关键的机会来考虑与人类相关的暴露场景,以识别吸入毒物的危害。与体内试验相比,体外方法具有更容易评估吸入毒物影响的优势,这些影响通过剂量测定的差异来表达,例如浓度(暴露强度)、暴露持续时间和暴露频率的变化。剂量测定的变化可用于获得可用于风险评估的人类相关暴露场景中的不良影响信息。基于已发表的使用呼吸道气液界面模型的暴露方法的文献,并补充了欧盟H2020项目“PATROLS”的额外实验数据和荷兰农业、自然和食品质量部资助的研究,总结和讨论了不同曝光方法的优缺点以及设计实验装置的注意事项。由于使用的细胞模型是呼吸上皮的模型,我们的重点是气道中的局部效应。总之,为了从吸入毒物风险评估的体外方法中生成数据,建议(1)考虑危害或风险评估真正需要什么信息;(2) 选择最适合待评估化学品的暴露系统;(3) 使用模拟人体在呼吸道中沉积的沉积剂量,并且(4)应仔细考虑暴露后采样方法并与所使用的测试策略相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The importance of variations in in vitro dosimetry to support risk assessment of inhaled toxicants.

In vitro methods provide a key opportunity to model human-relevant exposure scenarios for hazard identification of inhaled toxicants. Compared to in vivo tests, in vitro methods have the advantage of assessing effects of inhaled toxicants caused by differences in dosimetry, e.g., variations in con­centration (exposure intensity), exposure duration, and exposure frequency, in an easier way. Variations in dosimetry can be used to obtain information on adverse effects in human-relevant exposure scenarios that can be used for risk assessment. Based on the published literature of exposure approaches using air-liquid interface models of the respiratory tract, supplemented with additional experimental data from the EU H2020 project “PATROLS” and research funded by the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, the advantages and disadvantages of dif­ferent exposure methods and considerations to design an experimental setup are summarized and discussed. As the cell models used are models for the respiratory epithelium, our focus is on the local effects in the airways. In conclusion, in order to generate data from in vitro methods for risk assessment of inhaled toxicants it is recommended that (1) it is considered what information really is needed for hazard or risk assessment; (2) the exposure system that is most suitable for the chemical to be assessed is chosen; (3) a deposited dose that mimics deposition in the human respiratory tract is used, and (4) the post-exposure sampling methodology should be carefully considered and relevant to the testing strategy used.

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
Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation
Altex-Alternatives To Animal Experimentation MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
8.90%
发文量
89
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: ALTEX publishes original articles, short communications, reviews, as well as news and comments and meeting reports. Manuscripts submitted to ALTEX are evaluated by two expert reviewers. The evaluation takes into account the scientific merit of a manuscript and its contribution to animal welfare and the 3R principle.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信