Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34755872›Full record

ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2022

The Future of Uncertainty Factors With In Vitro Studies Using Human Cells.

Michael Dourson, Lorna Ewart, Suzanne C Fitzpatrick, Silvia B M Barros, Brinda Mahadevan, A Wallace Hayes

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Extrapolation steps in quantitativeCurrent research in toxicology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Decision-Making with New Approach Methodologies: Time to Replace Default Uncertainty Factors with Data.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2022
    Article
  9. Microphysiological Systems Evaluation: Experience of TEX-VAL Tissue Chip Testing Consortium.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael DoursonTERA, Cincinnati, Ohio 45223, USA.
Lorna EwartEmulate Inc., Boston, Massachusetts 02210, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8258-7460
Suzanne C FitzpatrickCFSAN, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, College Park, Maryland 20740, USA.
Silvia B M BarrosUniversity of São Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Brinda MahadevanBrincor Associates, LLC, New Albany, Ohio 43054, USA.
A Wallace HayesCollege of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida 33612, USA.
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition · USEmulate (United States) · USTeradata (United States) · USUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversity of South Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New approach methodologies (NAMs), including in vitro toxicology methods such as human cells from simple cell cultures to 3D and organ-on-a-chip models of human lung, intestine, liver, and other organs, are challenging the traditional "norm" of current regulatory risk assessments. Uncertainty Factors continue to be used by regulatory agencies to account for perceived deficits in toxicology data. With the expanded use of human cell NAMs, the question "Are uncertainty factors needed when human cells are used?" becomes a key topic in the development of 21st-century regulatory risk assessment. M.D., PhD, the coauthor of an article detailing uncertainty factors within the U.S. EPA, and L.E., PhD., Executive Vice President, Science, Emulate, who is involved in developing organ-on-a-chip models, debated the topic. One important outcome of the debate was that in the case of in vitro human cells on a chip, the interspecies (animal to human) uncertainty factor of 10 could be eliminated. However, in the case of the intraspecies (average human to sensitive human), the uncertainty factor of 10, additional toxicokinetic and/or toxicodynamic data or related information will be needed to reduce much less eliminate this factor. In the case of other currently used uncertainty factors, such as lowest observable adverse effect level to no-observed adverse effect level extrapolation, missing important toxicity studies, and acute/subchronic to chronic exposure extrapolation, additional data might be needed even when using in vitro human cells. Collaboration between traditional risk assessors with decades of experience with in vivo data and risk assessors working with modern technologies like organ chips is needed to find a way forward.

Indexed as

UncertaintyForecastingHumansIn Vitro TechniquesNo-Observed-Adverse-Effect LevelRisk Assessmentalternativesnew approach methodologiesorgan-on-a-chipuncertainty factors

Identifiers

PMID34755872
PMCPMC8883352
OpenAlexW3211633441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.