toxicity testing
Recently Published Documents





2022 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Nermin A. Osman

Abstract In silico toxicology is one type of toxicity assessment that uses computational methods to visualize, analyze, simulate, and predict the toxicity of chemicals. It is also one of the main steps in drug design. Animal models have been used for a long time for toxicity testing. Animal studies for the type of toxicological information needed are both expensive and time-consuming, and to that, ethical consideration is added. Many different types of in silico methods have been developed to characterize the toxicity of chemical materials and predict their catastrophic consequences to humans and the environment. In light of European legislation such as Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) and the Cosmetics Regulation, in silico methods for predicting chemical toxicity have become increasingly important and used extensively worldwide e.g., in the USA, Canada, Japan, and Australia. A popular problem, concerning these methods, is the deficiency of the necessary data for assessing the hazards. REACH has called for increased use of in silico tools for non-testing data as structure-activity relationships, quantitative structure-activity relationships, and read-across. The main objective of the review is to refine the use of in silico tools in a risk assessment context of industrial chemicals.

2022 ◽  
Jianwei Xu ◽  
Gang Liu ◽  
Xianyao Wang ◽  
Ya’nan Hu ◽  
Hongyang Luo ◽  

2022 ◽  
Joyce Borba ◽  
Vinicius Alves ◽  
Rodolpho Braga ◽  
Daniel Korn ◽  
Nicole Kleinstreuer ◽  

Abstract Safety evaluation for medical devices includes the toxicity assessment of chemicals used in device manufacturing, cleansing and/or sterilization that may leach into a patient. According to international standards on biocompatibility assessments (ISO 10993), chemicals that could be released from medical devices should be evaluated for their potential to induce skin sensitization/allergenicity, and one of the commonly used approaches is the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT). However, there is growing trend in regulatory science to move away from costly animal assays to employing New Approach Methodologies including computational methods. Herein, we developed a new computational tool for rapid and accurate prediction of the GPMT outcome that we named PreSS/MD (Predictor of Skin Sensitization for Medical Devices). To enable model development, we (i) collected, curated, and integrated the largest publicly available dataset for GPMT; (ii) succeeded in developing externally predictive (balanced accuracy of 70-74% as evaluated by both 5-fold external cross-validation and testing of novel compounds) Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships (QSAR) models for GPMT using machine learning algorithms, including Deep Learning; and (iii) developed a publicly accessible web portal integrating PreSS/MD models that enables the prediction of GPMT outcomes for any molecules using. We expect that PreSS/MD will be used by both researchers and regulatory agencies to support safety assessment for medical devices and help replace, reduce or refine the use of animals in toxicity testing. PreSS/MD is freely available at Keywords: sensitization, GPMT, QSAR, deep learning,

Metabolomics ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Julia M. Malinowska ◽  
Taina Palosaari ◽  
Jukka Sund ◽  
Donatella Carpi ◽  
Mounir Bouhifd ◽  

Abstract Introduction High-throughput screening (HTS) is emerging as an approach to support decision-making in chemical safety assessments. In parallel, in vitro metabolomics is a promising approach that can help accelerate the transition from animal models to high-throughput cell-based models in toxicity testing. Objective In this study we establish and evaluate a high-throughput metabolomics workflow that is compatible with a 96-well HTS platform employing 50,000 hepatocytes of HepaRG per well. Methods Low biomass cell samples were extracted for metabolomics analyses using a newly established semi-automated protocol, and the intracellular metabolites were analysed using a high-resolution spectral-stitching nanoelectrospray direct infusion mass spectrometry (nESI-DIMS) method that was modified for low sample biomass. Results The method was assessed with respect to sensitivity and repeatability of the entire workflow from cell culturing and sampling to measurement of the metabolic phenotype, demonstrating sufficient sensitivity (> 3000 features in hepatocyte extracts) and intra- and inter-plate repeatability for polar nESI-DIMS assays (median relative standard deviation < 30%). The assays were employed for a proof-of-principle toxicological study with a model toxicant, cadmium chloride, revealing changes in the metabolome across five sampling times in the 48-h exposure period. To allow the option for lipidomics analyses, the solvent system was extended by establishing separate extraction methods for polar metabolites and lipids. Conclusions Experimental, analytical and informatics workflows reported here met pre-defined criteria in terms of sensitivity, repeatability and ability to detect metabolome changes induced by a toxicant and are ready for application in metabolomics-driven toxicity testing to complement HTS assays.

Biology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Jihae Park ◽  
Eun-Jin Yoo ◽  
Kisik Shin ◽  
Stephen Depuydt ◽  
Wei Li ◽  

The common duckweed (Lemna minor), a freshwater monocot that floats on the surfaces of slow-moving streams and ponds, is commonly used in toxicity testing. The novel Lemna root- regrowth test is a toxicity test performed in replicate test vessels (24-well plates), each containing 3 mL test solution and a 2–3 frond colony. Prior to exposure, roots are excised from the plant, and newly developed roots are measured after 3 days of regrowth. Compared to the three internationally standardized methods, this bioassay is faster (72 h), simpler, more convenient (requiring only a 3-mL) and cheaper. The sensitivity of root regrowth to 3,5-dichlorophenol was statistically the same as using the conventional ISO test method. The results of interlaboratory comparison tests conducted by 10 international institutes showed 21.3% repeatability and 27.2% reproducibility for CuSO4 and 21.28% repeatability and 18.6% reproducibility for wastewater. These validity criteria are well within the generally accepted levels of <30% to 40%, confirming that this test method is acceptable as a standardized biological test and can be used as a regulatory tool. The Lemna root regrowth test complements the lengthier conventional protocols and is suitable for rapid screening of wastewater and priority substances spikes in natural waters.

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Jente Hoyberghs ◽  
Chloé Bars ◽  
Miriam Ayuso ◽  
Chris Van Ginneken ◽  
Kenn Foubert ◽  

Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is a popular solvent for developmental toxicity testing of chemicals and pharmaceuticals in zebrafish embryos. In general, it is recommended to keep the final DMSO concentration as low as possible for zebrafish embryos, preferably not exceeding 100 μL/L (0.01%). However, higher concentrations of DMSO are often required to dissolve compounds in an aqueous medium. The aim of this study was to determine the highest concentration of DMSO that can be safely used in our standardized Zebrafish Embryo Developmental Toxicity Assay (ZEDTA). In the first part of this study, zebrafish embryos were exposed to different concentrations (0–2%) of DMSO. No increase in lethality or malformations was observed when using DMSO concentrations up to 1%. In a follow-up experiment, we assessed whether compounds that cause no developmental toxicity in the ZEDTA remain negative when dissolved in 1% DMSO, as false positive results due to physiological disturbances by DMSO should be avoided. To this end, zebrafish embryos were exposed to ascorbic acid and hydrochlorothiazide dissolved in 1% DMSO. Negative control groups were also included. No significant increase in malformations or lethality was observed in any of the groups. In conclusion, DMSO concentrations up to 1% can be safely used to dissolve compounds in the ZEDTA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document