Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42266534›Full record

ArticleCurrent opinion in toxicology2025

Assessment of immunotoxicity in the 21st century: Where we are and what we need to replace animals.

Victor J Johnson, Dori R Germolec, Michael I Luster, Emanuela Corsini

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. 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

4 authors.

Victor J JohnsonBurleson Research Technologies, Inc., Morrisville, NC, USA.
Dori R GermolecDivision of Translational Toxicology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Michael I LusterBurleson Research Technologies, Inc., Morrisville, NC, USA.
Emanuela CorsiniLaboratory of Toxicology, Department of Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences 'Rodolfo Paoletti', Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.

Funding

NIEHS NIH HHS HHSN273201400017CNIH HHS HHSN273201400017C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The field of immunotoxicity assessment has traditionally relied on animal models, which have raised ethical concerns and presented limitations in terms of predictive accuracy and relevance to human health. This paper reviews the current state of immunotoxicity evaluation, emphasizing the importance of transitioning away from animal testing. Modern approaches, including in vitro methods, human-based studies, adverse outcome pathways (AOPs), and computational modeling, are discussed as viable alternatives. These non-animal methods offer enhanced predictive power and the potential for regulatory acceptance, though technical and practical challenges remain. Case studies demonstrate the success of non-animal methods, such as AOP-based assessments for skin sensitization and the pyrogen assay using whole blood cytokine assays. Despite these advances, further research is needed in areas like respiratory sensitization, developmental immunotoxicology (DIT), and microphysiological systems (MPS). Recommendations are provided to accelerate the adoption of new approach methodologies (NAMs), focusing on AOP frameworks. In conclusion, the paper highlights the key findings from current non-animal immunotoxicity research and issues a call to action for advancing these methods to improve safety assessment practices in the 21st century.

Identifiers

PMID42266534
PMCPMC13246151

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.