Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40270588›Full record

ArticleCurrent opinion in toxicology2025

The key characteristics concept.

Martyn T Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current opinion in toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Unveiling toxicological adverse outcomes: toward construction and simulation of large-scale networks.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2026
    Review
  2. 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

1 author.

Martyn T SmithSchool of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.

Funding

Training CoreP42ES004705 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI SMITH, MARTYN T · 1987 to 2025
$74.6M
NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES004705
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In evaluating whether a chemical can cause cancer or another adverse outcome, three lines of evidence are typically considered: epidemiology, animal bioassays and mechanistic evidence. The key characteristics (KCs) form the basis of a uniform approach for searching, organizing, and evaluating mechanistic evidence to support hazard identification. KCs are the established properties of the toxicants themselves and are generated from our understanding of mechanisms of toxicity. KCs have been published for carcinogens, endocrine disruptors and reproductive, liver immune and cardiovascular toxicants. We noted that several KCs were common to different types of toxicants, whereas others were highly specific. Hence, there may be overlapping umbrella KCs for potentially hazardous bioactive chemicals that could be used in predictive toxicology. There are, however, also clearly unique KCs for chemicals that primarily target a specific organ and these unique KCs could be especially important to predicting target organ toxicity. It is possible that

Indexed as

AOPsCancerCarcinogensHazardRisk assessmentToxicity

Identifiers

PMID40270588
PMCPMC12017793

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.