ArticleHuman genomics2026
Bridging the life-course exposome approach with a life-cycle perspective in safe and sustainable by design (SSbD) for chemical risk.
Article in Human genomics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) and life‑course exposome science share a primary‑prevention goal: reducing harmful exposures by intervening early in the chemical and product life cycle. Here we propose an integrated, replacement‑first decision workflow that links life‑course exposure considerations to SSbD stage‑gates using New Approach Methodologies (NAMs). The framework combines: (i) problem formulation informed by susceptible windows and populations; (ii) AOP‑guided selection and curation of mechanistic in vitro bioactivity evidence (e.g., ToxCast/Tox21, transcriptomics); (iii) physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling with quantitative in vitro‑to‑in vivo extrapolation to translate in vitro potency into internal dose anchors; and (iv) transparent multi‑criteria synthesis to support early design trade‑offs. We illustrate this approach with an endocrine‑relevant substitution scenario comparing bisphenol A (BPA) with a structurally similar alternative (BPAP) and a bio‑based monomer candidate (isosorbide). Estrogen receptor (ER) bioactivity anchors derived from curated HTS assays are contrasted with PBPK‑predicted internal concentration ranges to generate an internal margin for stage‑gate decisions. The example shows how candidates with weak or absent pathway‑relevant bioactivity can be advanced, while structurally similar alternatives with ER potency approaching predicted internal concentrations can be deprioritised or redesigned pending improved exposure controls. By explicitly mapping NAM outputs to AOP key events and life‑course windows, the workflow operationalises the 3Rs by replacing broad exploratory animal testing with targeted, human‑relevant evidence and reducing unnecessary in vivo studies through early prioritisation.
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.