Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34077545›Full record

ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2021

New Approach Methodology for Assessing Inhalation Risks of a Contact Respiratory Cytotoxicant: Computational Fluid Dynamics-Based Aerosol Dosimetry Modeling for Cross-Species and In Vitro Comparisons.

Richard A Corley, Andrew P Kuprat, Sarah R Suffield, Senthil Kabilan, Paul M Hinderliter, Kevin Yugulis, Tharacad S Ramanarayanan

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Cellular responses of lung cells cultured at an Air-liquid Interface are influenced by spatial nanoparticle deposition patterns in anAerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. New approach methodologies (NAMs) for theFrontiers in toxicology · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Richard A CorleyPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, USA.
Andrew P KupratPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, USA.
Sarah R SuffieldPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, USA.
Senthil KabilanPacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352, USA.
Paul M HinderliterSyngenta Crop Protection, Greensboro, North Carolina 27409, USA.
Kevin YugulisBattelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio 43201, USA.
Tharacad S RamanarayananSyngenta Crop Protection, Greensboro, North Carolina 27409, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4949-1037
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory · USSyngenta (United States) · USBattelle · US

Funding

3D IMAGING &COMPUTER MODEL OF THE RESPIRATORY TRACTR01HL073598 · NHLBI · BATTELLE PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORIES · PI CORLEY, RICHARD A · 2004 to 2014
$17.6M
Multiscale Modeling of Lung Disease-Influenced Aerosol DosimetryU01ES028669 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI DARQUENNE, CHANTAL · 2018 to 2022
$3.3M
Battelle Memorial Institute TK0253671National Heart, Lung and Blood InstituteNHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL073598NIEHS NIH HHS U01 ES028669NIH HHS R01 HL073598
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regulatory agencies are considering alternative approaches to assessing inhalation toxicity that utilizes in vitro studies with human cells and in silico modeling in lieu of additional animal studies. In support of this goal, computational fluid-particle dynamics models were developed to estimate site-specific deposition of inhaled aerosols containing the fungicide, chlorothalonil, in the rat and human for comparisons to prior rat inhalation studies and new human in vitro studies. Under bioassay conditions, the deposition was predicted to be greatest at the front of the rat nose followed by the anterior transitional epithelium and larynx corresponding to regions most sensitive to local contact irritation and cytotoxicity. For humans, simulations of aerosol deposition covering potential occupational or residential exposures (1-50 µm diameter) were conducted using nasal and oral breathing. Aerosols in the 1-5 µm range readily penetrated the deep region of the human lung following both oral and nasal breathing. Under actual use conditions (aerosol formulations >10 µm), the majority of deposited doses were in the upper conducting airways. Beyond the nose or mouth, the greatest deposition in the pharynx, larynx, trachea, and bronchi was predicted for aerosols in the 10-20 µm size range. Only small amounts of aerosols >20 µm penetrated past the pharyngeal region. Using the ICRP clearance model, local retained tissue dose metrics including maximal concentrations and areas under the curve were calculated for each airway region following repeated occupational exposures. These results are directly comparable with benchmark doses from in vitro toxicity studies in human cells leading to estimated human equivalent concentrations that reduce the reliance on animals for risk assessments.

Indexed as

HydrodynamicsLungAdministration, InhalationAerosolsAnimalsComputer SimulationHumansModels, BiologicalParticle SizeRatsAerosolsaerosol clearanceaerosol depositionCFDCFPDchlorothalonilrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID34077545
PMCPMC8331159
OpenAlexW3164190944

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.