Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34818430›Full record

ArticleALTEX2022

Implementing in vitro bioactivity data to modernize priority setting of chemical inventories.

Marc A Beal, Matthew Gagne, Sunil A Kulkarni, Grace Patlewicz, Russell S Thomas, Tara S Barton-Maclaren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ALTEX, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Application ofFrontiers in toxicology · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Incorporating new approach methods (NAMs) data in dose-response assessments: The future is now!Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A systematic analysis of read-across within REACH registration dossiers.Computational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Marc A BealHealthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Matthew GagneHealthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Sunil A KulkarniHealthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
Grace PatlewiczCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Russell S ThomasCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Tara S Barton-MaclarenHealthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Canada.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Internationally, there are thousands of existing and newly introduced chemicals in commerce, highlighting the ongoing importance of innovative approaches to identify emerging chemicals of concern. For many chemicals, there is a paucity of hazard and exposure data. Thus, there is a crucial need for efficient and robust approaches to address data gaps and support risk-based prioritization. Several studies have demonstrated the utility of in vitro bioactivity data from the ToxCast program in deriving points of departure (PODs). ToxCast contains data for nearly 1,400 endpoints per chemical, and the bioactivity concentrations, indicative of potential adverse outcomes, can be converted to human-equivalent PODs using high-throughput toxicokinetics (HTTK) modeling. However, data gaps need to be addressed for broader application: the limited chemical space of HTTK and quantitative high-throughput screening data. Here we explore the applicability of in silico models to address these data needs. Specifically, we used ADMET predictor for HTTK predictions and a generalized read-across approach to predict ToxCast bioactivity potency. We applied these models to profile 5,801 chemicals on Canada’s Domestic Substances List (DSL). To evaluate the approach’s performance, bioactivity PODs were compared with in vivo results from the EPA Toxicity Values database for 1,042 DSL chemicals. Comparisons demonstrated that the bioac­tivity PODs, based on ToxCast data or read-across, were conservative for 95% of the chemicals. Comparing bioactivity PODs to human exposure estimates supports the identification of chemicals of potential interest for further work. The bioac­tivity workflow shows promise as a powerful screening tool to support effective triaging of chemical inventories.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Screening AssaysDatabases, FactualHumansRisk AssessmentToxicokineticsevidence-based risk assessmenthigh-throughput screeninghigh-throughput toxicokineticsnew approach methodologiesread-across

Identifiers

PMID34818430
PMCPMC8973434

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.