ArticleRegulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP2019
Exploring current read-across applications and needs among selected U.S. Federal Agencies.
Article in Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human vs. cells vs. machine: A comparative analysis of toxicological points of departure derived from quantitative read-across (qRAx), in vitro data, and In silico predictions.Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative review of human health reference values of the United States.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025Review
- Mechanistic read-across comes of age: a comparative appraisal of EFSA 2025 guidance, ECHA's RAAF, and good read-across practice.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Review
- A systematic analysis of read-across within REACH registration dossiers.Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- Assessing human carcinogenicity risk of agrochemicals without the rodent cancer bioassay.Frontiers in toxicology · 2024Article
- Application of read-across methods as a framework for the estimation of emissions from chemical processes.Clean technologies and recycling · 2023Article
- Identifying xenobiotic metabolites withFrontiers in toxicology · 2023Article
- A Framework that Considers the Impacts of Time, Cost, and Uncertainty in the Determination of the Cost Effectiveness of Toxicity-Testing Methodologies.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2022Article
- Internationalization of read-across as a validated new approach method (NAM) for regulatory toxicology.ALTEX · 2020Article
- Transitioning the Generalised Read-Across approach (GenRA) to quantitative predictions: A case study using acute oral toxicity data.Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Read-across is a well-established data gap-filling technique applied for regulatory purposes. In US Environmental Protection Agency's New Chemicals Program under TSCA, read-across has been used extensively for decades, however the extent of application and acceptance of read-across among U.S. federal agencies is less clear. In an effort to build read-across capacity, raise awareness of the state of the science, and work towards a harmonization of read-across approaches across U.S. agencies, a new read-across workgroup was established under the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM). This is one of several ad hoc groups ICCVAM has convened to implement the ICCVAM Strategic Roadmap. In this article, we outline the charge and scope of the workgroup and summarize the current applications, tools used, and needs of the agencies represented on the workgroup for read-across. Of the agencies surveyed, the Environmental Protection Agency had the greatest experience in using read-across whereas other agencies indicated that they would benefit from gaining a perspective of the landscape of the tools and available guidance. Two practical case studies are also described to illustrate how the read-across approaches applied by two agencies vary on account of decision context.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.