ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2024
Enabling novel paradigms: a biological questions-based approach to human chemical hazard and drug safety assessment.
Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A twin transition in regulatory toxicology: moving toward Chemicals 2.0 and phasing out animal testing.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025Article
- Development of a workflow for in vitro on- and off-target cytotoxicity assessment of CAR T cell therapies to support first-in-human clinical trials: An orthogonal approach using human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cells as a surrogate for normal vital organ systems.Current research in toxicology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Throughput needs, costs of time and resources, and concerns about the use of animals in hazard and safety assessment studies are fueling a growing interest in adopting new approach methodologies for use in product development and risk assessment. However, current efforts to define "next-generation risk assessment" vary considerably across commercial and regulatory sectors, and an a priori definition of the biological scope of data needed to assess hazards is generally lacking. We propose that the absence of clearly defined questions that can be answered during hazard assessment is the primary barrier to the generation of a paradigm flexible enough to be used across varying product development and approval decision contexts. Herein, we propose a biological questions-based approach (BQBA) for hazard and safety assessment to facilitate fit-for-purpose method selection and more efficient evidence-based decision-making. The key pillars of this novel approach are bioavailability, bioactivity, adversity, and susceptibility. This BQBA is compared with current hazard approaches and is applied in scenarios of varying pathobiological understanding and/or regulatory testing requirements. To further define the paradigm and key questions that allow better prediction and characterization of human health hazard, a multidisciplinary collaboration among stakeholder groups should be initiated.
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.