Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34775645›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental and molecular mutagenesis2021

Utility of a next-generation framework for assessment of genomic damage: A case study using the pharmaceutical drug candidate etoposide.

John Nicolette, Mirjam Luijten, Jennifer C Sasaki, Laura Custer, Michelle Embry, Roland Froetschl, George Johnson, Gladys Ouedraogo, Raja Settivari, Veronique Thybaud and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental and molecular mutagenesis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors at 11 institutions in 6 countries.

John NicoletteAbbVie, Inc., North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Mirjam LuijtenCentre for Health Protection, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Jennifer C SasakiSeagen Inc., Bothell, Washington, USA.
Laura CusterBristol-Myers Squibb Company, Drug Safety Evaluation, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA.
Michelle EmbryHealth and Environmental Sciences Institute, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Roland FroetschlFederal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8721-7509
George JohnsonSwansea University Medical School, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5643-9942
Gladys OuedraogoL'Oréal Recherche & Innovation, Aulnay-Sous-Bois, France.
Raja SettivariCorteva Agriscience, Newark, Delaware, USA.
Veronique ThybaudSanofi, Research & Development, Chilly-Mazarin, France.
Kerry L DearfieldRetired, Burke, Virginia, USA.
AbbVie (United States) · USBristol-Myers Squibb (Germany) · DEBurke Foundation · USCorteva (United States) · USFederal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices · DEHealth and Environmental Sciences Institute · USL'Oréal (France) · FRNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NLSanofi (France) · FRSeagen (United States) · USSwansea University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present a hypothetical case study to examine the use of a next-generation framework developed by the Genetic Toxicology Technical Committee of the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute for assessing the potential risk of genetic damage from a pharmaceutical perspective. We used etoposide, a genotoxic carcinogen, as a representative pharmaceutical for the purposes of this case study. Using the framework as guidance, we formulated a hypothetical scenario for the use of etoposide to illustrate the application of the framework to pharmaceuticals. We collected available data on etoposide considered relevant for assessment of genetic toxicity risk. From the data collected, we conducted a quantitative analysis to estimate margins of exposure (MOEs) to characterize the risk of genetic damage that could be used for decision-making regarding the predefined hypothetical use. We found the framework useful for guiding the selection of appropriate tests and selecting relevant endpoints that reflected the potential for genetic damage in patients. The risk characterization, presented as MOEs, allows decision makers to discern how much benefit is critical to balance any adverse effect(s) that may be induced by the pharmaceutical. Interestingly, pharmaceutical development already incorporates several aspects of the framework per regulations and health authority expectations. Moreover, we observed that quality dose response data can be obtained with carefully planned but routinely conducted genetic toxicity testing. This case study demonstrates the utility of the next-generation framework to quantitatively model human risk based on genetic damage, as applicable to pharmaceuticals.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicDNA DamageEtoposideGenomicsHumansAntineoplastic Agents, PhytogenicEtoposideetoposidegenetic toxicityhuman health risk assessmentintegrated testing strategymutagenicity

Identifiers

PMID34775645
PMCPMC9299499
OpenAlexW3212136603

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.