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: The future of toxicity testing.
    Author: Andersen ME, Al-Zoughool M, Croteau M, Westphal M, Krewski D.
    Journal: J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2010 Feb; 13(2-4):163-96. PubMed ID: 20574896.
    Abstract:
    In 2007, the U.S. National Research Council (NRC) released a report, "Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy," that proposes a paradigm shift for toxicity testing of environmental agents. The vision is based on the notion that exposure to environmental agents leads to adverse health outcomes through the perturbation of toxicity pathways that are operative in humans. Implementation of the NRC vision will involve a fundamental change in the assessment of toxicity of environmental agents, moving away from adverse health outcomes observed in experimental animals to the identification of critical perturbations of toxicity pathways. Pathway perturbations will be identified using in vitro assays and quantified for dose response using methods in computational toxicology and other recent scientific advances in basic biology. Implementation of the NRC vision will require a major research effort, not unlike that required to successfully map the human genome, extending over 10 to 20 years, involving the broad scientific community to map important toxicity pathways operative in humans. This article provides an overview of the scientific tools and technologies that will form the core of the NRC vision for toxicity testing. Of particular importance will be the development of rapidly performed in vitro screening assays using human cells and cell lines or human tissue surrogates to efficiently identify environmental agents producing critical pathway perturbations. In addition to the overview of the NRC vision, this study documents the reaction by a number of stakeholder groups since 2007, including the scientific, risk assessment, regulatory, and animal welfare communities.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]