RISK-HUNT3R Logo

Trust your gut: Establishing confidence in gastrointestinal models – An overview of the state of the science and contexts of use

Jun 12, 2024 | 2024, Altex, Journal publications

Abstract

The webinar series and workshop titled Trust Your Gut: Establishing Confidence in Gastrointestinal Models – An Overview of the State of the Science and Contexts of Use was co-organized by NICEATM, NIEHS, FDA, EPA, CPSC, DoD, and the Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT) and hosted at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, MD, USA on October 11-12, 2023. New approach methods (NAMs) for assessing issues of gastrointestinal tract (GIT)-related toxicity offer promise in addressing some of the limitations associated with animal-based assessments. GIT NAMs vary in complexity, from two-dimensional monolayer cell line-based systems to sophisticated 3-dimensional organoid systems derived from human primary cells. Despite advances in GIT NAMs, challenges remain in fully replicating the complex interactions and processes occurring within the human GIT. Presentations and discussions addressed regulatory needs, challenges, and innovations in incorporating NAMs into risk assessment frameworks; explored the state of the science in using NAMs for evaluating systemic toxicity, understanding absorption and pharmacokinetics, evaluating GIT toxicity, and assessing potential allergenicity; and discussed strengths, limitations, and data gaps of GIT NAMs as well as steps needed to establish confidence in these models for use in the regulatory setting.

Protectiveness of NAM-based hazard assessment – which testing scope is required?

Feb 8, 2024 | 2023, Altex, Journal publications

Abstract

Hazard assessment (HA) requires toxicity tests to allow deriving protective points of departure (PoDs) for risk assessment irrespective of a compound’s mode of action (MoA). The scope of in vitro test batteries (ivTB) thereby necessitated for systemic toxicity is still unclear. We explored the protectiveness regarding systemic toxicity of an ivTB with a scope, which was guided by previous findings from rodent studies, where examining six main targets, including liver and kidney, was sufficient to predict the guideline scope-based PoD with high probability. The ivTB comprises human in vitro models representing liver, kidney, lung and the neuronal system covering transcriptome, mitochondrial dysfunction and neuronal outgrowth. Additionally, 32 CALUX®- and 10 HepG2 BAC-GFP reporters cover a broad range of disturbance mechanisms. Eight compounds were chosen for causing adverse effects such as immunotoxicity or anemia in vivo, i.e., effects not directly covered by assays in the ivTB. PoDs derived from the ivTB and from oral repeated dose studies in rodents were extrapolated to maximum unbound plasma concentrations for comparison. The ivTB-based PoDs were one to five orders of magnitude lower than in vivo PoDs for six of eight compounds, implying that they were protective. The extent of in vitro response varied across test compounds. Especially for hematotoxic substances, the ivTB showed either no response or only cytotoxicity. Assays better capturing this type of hazard would be needed to complement the ivTB. This study highlights the potentially broad applicability of ivTBs for deriving protective PoDs of compounds with unknown MoA.

Acceptance criteria for new approach methods in toxicology and human health-relevant life science research – part I

Feb 8, 2024 | 2023, Altex, Journal publications

Abstract

Every test procedure, scientific and non-scientific, has inherent uncertainties, even when performed according to a standard operating procedure (SOP). In addition, it is prone to errors, defects, and mistakes introduced by operators, laboratory equipment, or materials used. Adherence to an SOP and comprehensive validation of the test method cannot guarantee that each test run produces data within the acceptable range of variability and with the precision and accuracy determined during the method validation. We illustrate here (part I) why controlling the validity of each test run is an important element of experimental design. The definition and application of acceptance criteria (AC) for the validity of test runs is important for the setup and use of test methods, particularly for the use of new approach methods (NAM) in toxicity testing. AC can be used for decision rules on how to handle data, e.g., to accept the data for further use (AC fulfilled) or to reject the data (AC not fulfilled). The adherence to AC has important requirements and consequences that may seem surprising at first sight: (i) AC depend on a test method’s objectives, e.g., on the types/concentrations of chemicals tested, the regulatory context, the desired throughput; (ii) AC are applied and documented at each test run, while validation of a method (including the definition of AC) is only performed once; (iii) if AC are altered, then the set of data produced by a method can change. AC, if missing, are the blind spot of quality assurance: Test results may not be reliable and comparable. The establishment and uses of AC will be further detailed in part II of this series.

REACH out-numbered! The future of REACH and animal numbers

Feb 7, 2024 | 2023, Altex, Journal publications

Abstract

The EU’s REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) Regulation requires animal testing only as a last resort. However, our study (Knight et al., 2023) in this issue reveals that approximately 2.9 million animals have been used for REACH testing for reproductive toxicity, developmental toxicity, and repeated-dose toxicity alone as of December 2022. Currently, additional tests requiring about 1.3 million more animals are in the works. As compliance checks continue, more animal tests are anticipated. According to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), 75% of read-across methods have been rejected during compliance checks. Here, we estimate that 0.6 to 3.2 million animals have been used for other endpoints, likely at the lower end of this range. The ongoing discussion about the grouping of 4,500 regis-tered petrochemicals can still have a major impact on these numbers. The 2022 amendment of REACH is estimated to add 3.6 to 7.0 million animals. This information comes as the European Parliament is set to consider changes to REACH that could further increase animal testing. Two proposals currently under discussion would likely necessitate new animal testing: extending the requirement for a chemical safety assessment (CSA) to Annex VII substances could add 1.6 to 2.6 million animals, and the registration of polymers adds a challenge comparable to the petrochemical discussion. These findings high-light the importance of understanding the current state of REACH animal testing for the upcoming debate on REACH revisions as an opportunity to focus on reducing animal use.

Guidance document on Good Cell and Tissue Culture Practice 2.0 (GCCP 2.0)

Mar 13, 2023 | 2022, Altex, Journal publications

Abstract

Good Cell and Tissue Culture Practice (GCCP) 2.0 is an updated guidance document from GCCP 1.0 (published by ECVAM in 2005), which was developed for practical use in the laboratory to assure the reproducibility of in vitro (cell-based) work. The update in the guidance was essential as cell models have advanced dramatically to more complex culture systems and need more comprehensive quality management to ensure reproducibility and high-quality scientific data. This document describes six main principles to consider when performing cell culture including characterization and maintenance of essential characteristics, quality management, documentation and reporting, safety, education and training, and ethics. The document does not intend to impose detailed procedures but to describe potential quality issues. It is foreseen that the document will require further updates as the science and technologies evolve over time.