A Pragmatic Approach to Adverse Outcome Pathway Development and Evaluation

Author:

Svingen Terje1ORCID,Villeneuve Daniel L2ORCID,Knapen Dries3,Panagiotou Eleftheria Maria4,Draskau Monica Kam1,Damdimopoulou Pauliina4,O’Brien Jason M5

Affiliation:

1. Division of Diet, Disease Prevention and Toxicology, National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby DK 2800, Denmark

2. Great Lakes Toxicology and Ecology Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Duluth, Minnesota 55804, USA

3. Zebrafishlab, Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk 2610, Belgium

4. Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm 14186, Sweden

5. Ecotoxicology and Wildlife Health Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada

Abstract

Abstract The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) framework provides a practical means for organizing scientific knowledge that can be used to infer cause-effect relationships between stressor events and toxicity outcomes in intact organisms. It has reached wide acceptance as a tool to aid chemical safety assessment and regulatory toxicology by supporting a systematic way of predicting adverse health outcomes based on accumulated mechanistic knowledge. A major challenge for broader application of the AOP concept in regulatory toxicology, however, has been developing robust AOPs to a level where they are peer reviewed and accepted. This is because the amount of work required to substantiate the modular units of a complete AOP is considerable, to the point where it can take years from start to finish. To help alleviate this bottleneck, we propose a more pragmatic approach to AOP development whereby the focus becomes on smaller blocks. First, we argue that the key event relationship (KER) should be formally recognized as the core building block of knowledge assembly within the AOP knowledge base (AOP-KB), albeit framing them within full AOPs to ensure regulatory utility. Second, we argue that KERs should be developed using systematic review approaches, but only in cases where the underlying concept does not build on what is considered canonical knowledge. In cases where knowledge is considered canonical, rigorous systematic review approaches should not be required. It is our hope that these approaches will contribute to increasing the pace at which the AOP-KB is populated with AOPs with utility for chemical safety assessors and regulators.

Funder

Danish Environmental Protection Agency as a project under the Centre on Endocrine Disrupters

Swedish Chemicals Agency and the Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development FORMAS

European Union’s Horizon 2020 FREIA

European Union’s Horizon 2020 project ERGO

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Toxicology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3