ArticleRegulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP2024
Adverse effects in traditional and alternative toxicity tests.
Article in Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- New approach methodologies for next-generation risk assessment of nanomaterials and nano-enabled products.Nano convergence · 2026Review
- Extrapolation of in vitro effect concentrations to in vivo bioavailable concentrations using PBK modelling in humans for two classes of persistent and mobile compounds: triazoles and triazines.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- The way forward for assessing the human health safety of cosmetics in the EU: Proceedings of Workshop 2.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- Exposomics as a discovery engine for emerging contaminants and hidden biological risks.Emerging contaminants · 2026Article
- New approach methodologies (NAMs) for improved developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART) assessment with focus on endocrine disruption - a PARC project.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Review
- Exploring experiences of the regulatory toxicology system: system-level promoters and inhibitors of new approach methodologies.Archives of toxicology · 2025Article
- Revolutionizing toxicological risk assessment: integrative advances in new approach methodologies (NAMs) and precision toxicology.Archives of toxicology · 2025Review
- Integrating Transcriptomic and Targeted New Approach Methodologies into a Tiered Framework for Chemical Bioactivity Screening.Environmental health perspectives · 2025Article
- Advancing systemic toxicity risk assessment: Evaluation of a NAM-based toolbox approach.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a non-animal toolbox informed by adverse outcome pathways for human inhalation safety.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Article
- Editorial: Model organisms in predictive toxicology 2023.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- An advancement in developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART) risk assessment: evaluation of a bioactivity and exposure-based NAM toolbox.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Article
- Community-Engaged Research and the Use of Open Access ToxVal/ToxRef In Vivo Databases and New Approach Methodologies (NAM) to Address Human Health Risks From Environmental Contaminants.Birth defects research · 2024Article
- Time for CHANGE: system-level interventions for bringing forward the date of effective use of NAMs in regulatory toxicology.Archives of toxicology · 2024Article
- Identification of neural-relevant toxcast high-throughput assay intended gene targets: Applicability to neurotoxicity and neurotoxicant putative molecular initiating events.Neurotoxicology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chemical safety assessment begins with defining the lowest level of chemical that alters one or more measured endpoints. This critical effect level, along with factors to account for uncertainty, is used to derive limits for human exposure. In the absence of data regarding the specific mechanisms or biological pathways affected, non-specific endpoints such as body weight and non-target organ weight changes are used to set critical effect levels. Specific apical endpoints such as impaired reproductive function or altered neurodevelopment have also been used to set chemical safety limits; however, in test guidelines designed for specific apical effect(s), concurrently measured non-specific endpoints may be equally or more sensitive than specific endpoints. This means that rather than predicting a specific toxicological response, animal data are often used to develop protective critical effect levels, without assuming the same change would be observed in humans. This manuscript is intended to encourage a rethinking of how adverse chemical effects are interpreted: non-specific endpoints from in vivo toxicological studies data are often used to derive points of departure for use with safety assessment factors to create recommended exposure levels that are broadly protective but not necessarily target-specific.
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.