Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30202884›Full record

ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2019

Identifying Attributes That Influence In Vitro-to-In Vivo Concordance by Comparing In Vitro Tox21 Bioactivity Versus In Vivo DrugMatrix Transcriptomic Responses Across 130 Chemicals.

William D Klaren, Caroline Ring, Mark A Harris, Chad M Thompson, Susan Borghoff, Nisha S Sipes, Jui-Hua Hsieh, Scott S Auerbach, Julia E Rager

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Bayesian matrix completion for hypothesis testing.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied statistics · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Exposure forecasting - ExpoCast - for data-poor chemicals in commerce and the environment.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2022
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Predictive modeling of biological responses in the rat liver usingComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021
    Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

William D KlarenDepartment of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77840.
Caroline RingToxStrategies, Inc., Austin, Texas 78751.
Mark A HarrisToxStrategies, Inc., Houston, Texas 77494.
Chad M ThompsonToxStrategies, Inc., Houston, Texas 77494.
Susan BorghoffToxStrategies, Inc., Cary, North Carolina 27511.
Nisha S SipesNational Toxicology Program, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709and.
Jui-Hua HsiehKelly Government Solutions, Durham, North Carolina 27709.
Scott S AuerbachNational Toxicology Program, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709and.
Julia E RagerToxStrategies, Inc., Austin, Texas 78751.

Funding

UNC-CH CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH &SUSCEPTIBILITYP30ES010126 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Stephanie Engel · 2001 to 2026
$36.3M
Biomolecular Screening and Alternative Approaches for the National Toxicology ProgramZIAES103318 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CASEY, WARREN · 2016 to 2021
$25.0M
Regulatory Science in Environmental Health and ToxicologyT32ES026568 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Weihsueh A Chiu, Natalie M Johnson · 2016 to 2026
$3.8M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES010126NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES026568
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent efforts aimed at integrating in vitro high-throughput screening (HTS) data into chemical toxicity assessments are necessitating increased understanding of concordance between chemical-induced responses observed in vitro versus in vivo. This investigation set out to (1) measure concordance between in vitro HTS data and transcriptomic responses observed in vivo, focusing on the liver, and (2) identify attributes that can influence concordance. Signal response profiles from 130 substances were compared between in vitro data produced through Tox21 and liver transcriptomic data through DrugMatrix, collected from rats exposed to a chemical for ≤5 days. A global in vitro-to-in vivo comparative analysis based on pathway-level responses resulted in an overall average percent agreement of 79%, ranging on a per-chemical basis between 41% and 100%. Whereas concordance amongst inactive chemicals was high (89%), concordance amongst chemicals showing in vitro activity was only 13%, suggesting that follow-up in vivo and/or orthogonal in vitro assays would improve interpretations of in vitro activity. Attributes identified to influence concordance included experimental design attributes (eg, cell type), target pathways, and physicochemical properties (eg, logP). The attribute that most consistently increased concordance was dose applicability, evaluated by filtering for experimental doses administered to rats that were within 10-fold of those related to likely bioactivity, derived using Tox21 data and high-throughput toxicokinetic modeling. Together, findings suggest that in vitro screening approaches to predict in vivo toxicity are viable particularly when certain attributes are considered, including whether activity versus inactivity is observed, experimental design, chemical properties, and dose applicability.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualModels, TheoreticalAnimalsComputer SimulationHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysHumansLiverSmall Molecule LibrariesToxicity TestsToxicokineticsTranscriptomeSmall Molecule Libraries

Identifiers

PMID30202884
PMCPMC6317427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.