Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28757310›Full record

ArticleNeurotoxicology and teratology2017

Recommendations for harmonization of data collection and analysis of developmental neurotoxicity endpoints in regulatory guideline studies: Proceedings of workshops presented at Society of Toxicology and joint Teratology Society and Neurobehavioral Teratology Society meetings.

Abby A Li, Larry P Sheets, Kathleen Raffaele, Virginia Moser, Angela Hofstra, Alan Hoberman, Susan L Makris, Robert Garman, Brad Bolon, Wolfgang Kaufmann and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurotoxicology and teratology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Achieving CLARITY on bisphenol A, brain and behaviour.Journal of neuroendocrinology · 2020
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.

Abby A LiExponent Health Science, Inc., USA. Electronic address: abbyli@exponent.com.
Larry P SheetsBayer CropScience, USA. Electronic address: Larry.sheets@bayer.com.
Kathleen RaffaeleUS EPA Office of Land and Emergency Management, USA. Electronic address: Raffaele.kathleen@epa.gov.
Virginia MoserUS EPA National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development (NHEERL, ORD), USA.
Angela HofstraSyngenta Canada, Canada. Electronic address: Angela.hofstra@syngenta.com.
Alan HobermanCharles River Laboratories, Global Developmental, Reproductive and Juvenile Toxicology, USA. Electronic address: Alan.Hoberman@crl.com.
Susan L MakrisUS EPA National Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development (NCEA ORD), USA. Electronic address: Makris.Susan@epa.gov.
Robert GarmanConsultants in Veterinary Pathology, Inc., USA. Electronic address: vetpathol@cs.com.
Brad BolonGEMpath Inc., USA. Electronic address: Bradgempath@aol.com.
Wolfgang KaufmannMerck KGaA, Global Pathology & Reproductive Toxicology, Germany.
Roland AuerUniversity of Saskatchewan, Department of Pathology, Canada. Electronic address: roland.auer@usask.ca.
Edmund LauExponent Health Science, Inc., USA. Electronic address: Elau@exponent.com.
Thomas VidmarBioSTAT Consultants, USA. Electronic address: tomvidmar@biostat.com.
Wayne J BowersDepartment of Neuroscience, Carleton University, Ontario, Canada.
Environmental Protection Agency · USExponent (United States) · USBayer (United States) · USBiovista (United States) · USCarleton University · CACatticus Corporation · USCharles River Laboratories (Netherlands) · NLMerck (Germany) · DENewPath Research · USSyngenta (Canada) · CAUniversity of Saskatchewan · CA

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The potential for developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) of environmental chemicals may be evaluated using specific test guidelines from the US Environmental Protection Agency or the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). These guidelines generate neurobehavioral, neuropathological, and morphometric data that are evaluated by regulatory agencies globally. Data from these DNT guideline studies, or the more recent OECD extended one-generation reproductive toxicity guideline, play a pivotal role in children's health risk assessment in different world areas. Data from the same study may be interpreted differently by regulatory authorities in different countries resulting in inconsistent evaluations that may lead to inconsistencies in risk assessment decisions internationally, resulting in regional differences in public health protection or in commercial trade barriers. These issues of data interpretation and reporting are also relevant to juvenile and pre-postnatal studies conducted more routinely for pharmaceuticals and veterinary medicines. There is a need for development of recommendations geared toward the operational needs of the regulatory scientific reviewers who apply these studies in risk assessments, as well as the scientists who generate DNT data sets. The workshops summarized here draw upon the experience of the authors representing government, industry, contract research organizations, and academia to discuss the scientific issues that have emerged from diverse regulatory evaluations. Although various regulatory bodies have different risk management decisions and labeling requirements that are difficult to harmonize, the workshops provided an opportunity to work toward more harmonized scientific approaches for evaluating DNT data within the context of different regulatory frameworks. Five speakers and their coauthors with neurotoxicology, neuropathology, and regulatory toxicology expertise discussed issues of variability, data reporting and analysis, and expectations in DNT data that are encountered by regulatory authorities. In addition, principles for harmonized evaluation of data were suggested using guideline DNT data as case studies.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicNeurotoxicity SyndromesToxicity TestsAnimalsCongresses as TopicHumansResearch DesignSocieties, ScientificTeratologyUnited StatesUnited States Environmental Protection AgencyBehaviorDevelopmental neurotoxicity testingExtended one-generation reproductive toxicityLearning and memoryMorphometryNeuropathology

Identifiers

PMID28757310
PMCPMC6634984
OpenAlexW2741348000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.