Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37296313›Full record

ArticleArchives of toxicology2023

Applying genomics in regulatory toxicology: a report of the ECETOC workshop on omics threshold on non-adversity.

Timothy W Gant, Scott S Auerbach, Martin Von Bergen, Mounir Bouhifd, Philip A Botham, Florian Caiment, Richard A Currie, Joshua Harrill, Kamin Johnson, Dongying Li and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of toxicology, 2023. 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
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Analytical choices drive toxicogenomic potency estimates: a systematic evaluation of transcriptomic points of departure.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. The OASIS Consortium: integrating multi-omics technologies to transform chemical safety assessment.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Molecular response ofCurrent research in toxicology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

17 authors.

Timothy W GantUnited Kingdom Health Security Agency, Harwell Science Campus, Didcot, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom. tim.gant@ukhsa.gov.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9057-4937
Scott S AuerbachDivision of Translational Toxicology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, RTP, Durham, NC, USA.
Martin Von BergenDepartment for Molecular Systems Biology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Leipzig, Germany.
Mounir BouhifdEuropean Chemicals Agency, 00121, Helsinki, Finland.
Philip A BothamSyngenta, Jealott's Hill, Bracknell, Berkshire, UK.
Florian CaimentDepartment of Toxicogenomics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Richard A CurrieSyngenta, Jealott's Hill, Bracknell, Berkshire, UK.
Joshua HarrillCellular and Molecular Toxicologist, Center for Computational Toxicology and Exposure (CCTE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Durham, NC, USA.
Kamin JohnsonPredictive Safety Center, Corteva Agriscience, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Dongying LiNational Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, AR, 72079, USA.
David RouquieBayer SAS, Bayer Crop Science, 355 Rue Dostoïevski, CS 90153, 06906, Valbonne Sophia-Antipolis, France.
Ben van RavenzwaayEnvironmental Sciences Consulting, 67122, Altrip, Germany.
Frank SistareUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Tewes TralauDepartment of Pesticides Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
Mark R ViantSchool of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jan Willem van de LaanMedicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Carole YaukDepartment of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a joint effort involving scientists from academia, industry and regulatory agencies, ECETOC's activities in Omics have led to conceptual proposals for: (1) A framework that assures data quality for reporting and inclusion of Omics data in regulatory assessments; and (2) an approach to robustly quantify these data, prior to interpretation for regulatory use. In continuation of these activities this workshop explored and identified areas of need to facilitate robust interpretation of such data in the context of deriving points of departure (POD) for risk assessment and determining an adverse change from normal variation. ECETOC was amongst the first to systematically explore the application of Omics methods, now incorporated into the group of methods known as New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), to regulatory toxicology. This support has been in the form of both projects (primarily with CEFIC/LRI) and workshops. Outputs have led to projects included in the workplan of the Extended Advisory Group on Molecular Screening and Toxicogenomics (EAGMST) group of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and to the drafting of OECD Guidance Documents for Omics data reporting, with potentially more to follow on data transformation and interpretation. The current workshop was the last in a series of technical methods development workshops, with a sub-focus on the derivation of a POD from Omics data. Workshop presentations demonstrated that Omics data developed within robust frameworks for both scientific data generation and analysis can be used to derive a POD. The issue of noise in the data was discussed as an important consideration for identifying robust Omics changes and deriving a POD. Such variability or "noise" can comprise technical or biological variation within a dataset and should clearly be distinguished from homeostatic responses. Adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) were considered a useful framework on which to assemble Omics methods, and a number of case examples were presented in illustration of this point. What is apparent is that high dimension data will always be subject to varying processing pipelines and hence interpretation, depending on the context they are used in. Yet, they can provide valuable input for regulatory toxicology, with the pre-condition being robust methods for the collection and processing of data together with a comprehensive description how the data were interpreted, and conclusions reached.

Indexed as

Adverse Outcome PathwaysGenomicsResearch DesignRisk AssessmentToxicogeneticsECETOCPODSTranscriptomicsWorkshop

Identifiers

PMID37296313
PMCPMC10322787

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.