These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Current developments in reproductive toxicity testing of pesticides.
    Author: Cooper RL.
    Journal: Reprod Toxicol; 2009 Sep; 28(2):180-7. PubMed ID: 19409482.
    Abstract:
    A protocol to evaluate the potential developmental and reproductive effects of test chemicals has been developed by the Life Stages Task Force of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI)/Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) Agricultural Chemical Safety Assessment (ACSA) Technical Committee. Since the original publication, several international groups have provided public comment on conducting the test. The extended one-generation reproductive toxicity test is now under consideration as a potential test guideline. The protocol uses a flexible approach that is markedly different from the current multigenerational guidelines. It encourages the use of toxicokinetics when setting the doses, evaluates more than one rat per sex per litter in the F1 offspring and does not necessarily require mating of the F1 to produce an F2 (F1 mating may be triggered by the presence of effects in the P0 and developing F1 rats). A number of additional reproductive endpoints, and the neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity cohorts are included. The ACSA protocol was developed with the goal of assuring that the methods are scientifically appropriate and the toxicological endpoints and exposure durations are relevant for risk assessment. Compared to existing testing strategies, the proposed approach uses substantially fewer animals, provides additional information on the neonate, juvenile and pubertal animal, and includes an estimation of human exposure potential for making decisions about the extent of testing required. In this paper, the evolution of the protocol since the 2006 publication is discussed. These changes reflect the collective input of a U.S. expert panel of government and industrial scientist convened in 2007 and discussions of an OECD expert group held in Paris, France (October, 2008).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]