ArticleNeurotoxicology2026
Prioritizing chemicals for developmental neurotoxicity by integrating data from a new approach methods (NAMs) battery covering key cellular events in neurodevelopment.
Article in Neurotoxicology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Thousands of chemicals have not been assessed for developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) despite potential human exposure, prompting efforts to screen chemicals for possible DNT hazard using in vitro approaches. Ninety-five chemicals were screened in in a battery including in vitro assays covering the key neurodevelopmental processes (KNDPs) of proliferation, apoptosis, cell migration, neuronal differentiation, neurite outgrowth, neuronal maturation and synaptogenesis, oligodendrocyte differentiation, and network formation using human and rat (primary cortical) cells. An in vivo assay of zebrafish neurobehavior was also included. This assay battery was sensitive enough to detect effects in the neurodevelopmental processes modeled. The chemicals comprised negative controls and several use classes: drugs, flame retardants, fungicides, herbicides, industrial chemicals (including PFAS), and insecticides. A data analysis pipeline was developed using a benchmark concentration approach and included multi-objective optimization (Pareto) and ToxPi analysis to integrate data from the individual assays to evaluate DNT hazard and prioritize chemicals, ranking them for further evaluation. Although the zebrafish assay was the most sensitive for detecting potency, selectivity varies significantly by assay and chemical class with neurite outgrowth assays and fungicides exhibiting the highest percentage of selective hits. Chemicals from the fungicide, drug, and insecticide use classes had higher priority in the Pareto and ToxPi analysis based on having the most potent and selective activity in the assays. These prioritization methods represent a novel and useful approach for comparative evaluation of potential developmental neurotoxicity hazard in large groups of chemicals.
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.