ReviewCritical reviews in toxicology2023
International regulatory uses of acute systemic toxicity data and integration of new approach methodologies.
Review in Critical reviews in toxicology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of lawsone and lawsone methyl ether on cyclooxygenase activity, redox balance, and organ-specific toxicity: An integrated computational and experimental study.Toxicology reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Nanotechnologies for Skin Drug Delivery: Polymeric, Bio-Based, and Hybrid Nanocarriers with Clinical and Translational Perspectives.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Beyond animal testing: An integrated framework for modern chemical hazard identification and risk assessment.Environmental science and ecotechnology · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Evaluation of Toxicological Profile and Immunomodulatory Impact of an Immune Enhancing Oral Liquid.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Computational histology reveals that concomitant application of insect repellent with sunscreen impairs UV protection in an ex vivo human skin model.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 10 institutions in 8 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Chemical regulatory authorities around the world require systemic toxicity data from acute exposures via the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes for human health risk assessment. To identify opportunities for regulatory uses of non-animal replacements for these tests, we reviewed acute systemic toxicity testing requirements for jurisdictions that participate in the International Cooperation on Alternative Test Methods (ICATM): Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the USA. The chemical sectors included in our review of each jurisdiction were cosmetics, consumer products, industrial chemicals, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and pesticides. We found acute systemic toxicity data were most often required for hazard assessment, classification, and labeling, and to a lesser extent quantitative risk assessment. Where animal methods were required, animal reduction methods were typically recommended. For many jurisdictions and chemical sectors, non-animal alternatives are not accepted, but several jurisdictions provide guidance to support the use of test waivers to reduce animal use for specific applications. An understanding of international regulatory requirements for acute systemic toxicity testing will inform ICATM's strategy for the development, acceptance, and implementation of non-animal alternatives to assess the health hazards and risks associated with acute toxicity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.