ArticleALTEX2025
Mapping out strategies to further develop human-relevant, new approach methodology (NAM)-based developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) testing.
Article in ALTEX, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling platforms for developmental neurotoxicity in vitro to in vivo extrapolation.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026Article
- Next generation validation for next generation risk assessment.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Review
- Article
- Path dependency and the rescuing of the biomedical research enterprise.Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
Abstract
On occasion of the DNT5 meeting in Konstanz, Germany (April 2024), participants brainstormed on future challenges concerning a regulatory implementation of the developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) in vitro test battery (DNT-IVB). The five discussion topics below outline some of the key issues, opportunities, and research directions for the next several years: (1) How to contextualize DNT hazard with information on potential maternal toxicity or other toxicity domains (non-DNT)? Several approaches on how to use cytotoxicity data from new approach methodologies (NAMs) were discussed. (2) What opportunities exist for an immediate or near-future application of the DNT-IVB, e.g., as a prioritization step or add-on to other information? Initial examples are already emerging; the data can be used even if the battery is not converted to a defined approach. (3) How to establish data interpretation procedures for multi-dimensional endpoints that reduce dimensionality and are suitable for classification? A decision framework is required on how to use the DNT-IVB in a regulatory context. Machine learning may provide novel classification models. (4) How can a battery of molecular initiating events (MIEs) be smartly linked to the DNT-IVB? At what tier of an overall strategy would MIEs be evaluated, and how would one optimally balance cost vs information yield. (5) What is the way forward to scientific validation of DNT NAMs and the DNT-IVB? A large set of animal data would be required for conventional approaches, while mechanistic information may establish relevance in other ways.
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.