Toward Good Read-Across Practice (GRAP)

Summary Grouping of substances and utilizing read-across of data within those groups represents an important data gap filling technique for chemical safety assessments. Categories/analogue groups are typically developed based on structural similarity and, increasingly often, also on mechanistic (biological) similarity. While read-across can play a key role in complying with legislation such as the European REACH regulation, the lack of consensus regarding the extent and type of evidence necessary to support it often hampers its successful application and acceptance by regulatory authorities. Despite a potentially broad user community, expertise is still concentrated across a handful of organizations and individuals. In order to facilitate the effective use of read-across, this document presents the state of the art, summarizes insights learned from reviewing ECHA published decisions regarding the relative successes/pitfalls surrounding readacross under REACH, and compiles the relevant activities and guidance documents. Special emphasis is given to the available existing tools and approaches, an analysis of ECHA’s published final decisions associated with all levels of compliance checks and testing proposals, the consideration and expression of uncertainty, the use of biological support data, and the impact of the ECHA Read-Across Assessment Framework (RAAF) published in 2015.

[1]  Antony J. Williams,et al.  The Chemical Validation and Standardization Platform (CVSP): large-scale automated validation of chemical structure datasets , 2015, Journal of Cheminformatics.

[2]  Daniel P. Russo,et al.  Global Analysis of Publicly Available Safety Data for 9,801 Substances Registered under REACH from 2008–2014 , 2016, ALTEX.

[3]  G Patlewicz,et al.  Building scientific confidence in the development and evaluation of read-across. , 2015, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[4]  H. Yamada,et al.  The Japanese toxicogenomics project: application of toxicogenomics. , 2010, Molecular nutrition & food research.

[5]  Fabian P. Steinmetz,et al.  The identification of nuclear receptors associated with hepatic steatosis to develop and extend adverse outcome pathways , 2016, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[6]  Nicholas Ball,et al.  Use of category approaches, read-across and (Q)SAR: general considerations. , 2013, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[7]  Alexander Tropsha,et al.  Best Practices for QSAR Model Development, Validation, and Exploitation , 2010, Molecular informatics.

[8]  Linda S. Birnbaum,et al.  Intersection of Systematic Review Methodology with the NIH Reproducibility Initiative , 2014, Environmental health perspectives.

[9]  Valérie Zuang,et al.  A Modular Approach to the ECVAM Principles on Test Validity , 2004, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[10]  Sean Ekins,et al.  A quality alert and call for improved curation of public chemistry databases. , 2011, Drug discovery today.

[11]  T W Schultz,et al.  A strategy for structuring and reporting a read-across prediction of toxicity. , 2015, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[12]  Robert J Kavlock,et al.  Phenotypic screening of the ToxCast chemical library to classify toxic and therapeutic mechanisms , 2014, Nature Biotechnology.

[13]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Chemical regulators have overreached , 2009, Nature.

[14]  Judy Strickland,et al.  A Curated Database of Rodent Uterotrophic Bioactivity , 2015, Environmental health perspectives.

[15]  Michael Balls,et al.  Guidance on Good Cell Culture Practice , 2005, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[16]  Hao Zhu,et al.  Analysis of Draize Eye Irritation Testing and its Prediction by Mining Publicly Available 2008–2014 REACH Data , 2016, ALTEX.

[17]  M. Fielden,et al.  Development of a large-scale chemogenomics database to improve drug candidate selection and to understand mechanisms of chemical toxicity and action. , 2005, Journal of biotechnology.

[18]  Alexandra Maertens,et al.  Analysis of Public Oral Toxicity Data from REACH Registrations 2008–2014 , 2016, ALTEX.

[19]  Alexander Golbraikh,et al.  Integrative chemical-biological read-across approach for chemical hazard classification. , 2013, Chemical research in toxicology.

[20]  Imran Shah,et al.  Systematically evaluating read-across prediction and performance using a local validity approach characterized by chemical structure and bioactivity information. , 2016, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[21]  Antonio Marcomini,et al.  Grouping and Read-Across Approaches for Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials , 2015, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[22]  Igor Linkov,et al.  From "Weight of Evidence" to Quantitative Data Integration using Multicriteria Decision Analysis and Bayesian Methods , 2015, ALTEX.

[23]  Richard R Rabbit,et al.  How are reproductive toxicity and developmental toxicity addressed in REACH dossiers? , 2011, ALTEX.

[24]  Nicole Kleinstreuer,et al.  Supporting read-across using biological data. , 2016, ALTEX.

[25]  Sebastian Hoffmann,et al.  Food for thought ... on in silico methods in toxicology. , 2009, ALTEX.

[26]  Judith C Madden,et al.  Formation of categories from structure-activity relationships to allow read-across for risk assessment: toxicity of alpha,beta-unsaturated carbonyl compounds. , 2008, Chemical research in toxicology.

[27]  Alexandra Maertens,et al.  Analysis of Publically Available Skin Sensitization Data from REACH Registrations 2008–2014 , 2016, ALTEX.

[28]  John D. Walker,et al.  Use of QSARs in international decision-making frameworks to predict ecologic effects and environmental fate of chemical substances. , 2003, Environmental health perspectives.

[29]  John D. Walker,et al.  Use of QSARs in international decision-making frameworks to predict health effects of chemical substances. , 2003, Environmental health perspectives.

[30]  George Daston,et al.  Framework for identifying chemicals with structural features associated with the potential to act as developmental or reproductive toxicants. , 2013, Chemical research in toxicology.

[31]  Richard A Becker,et al.  Read-across approaches--misconceptions, promises and challenges ahead. , 2014, ALTEX.

[32]  Christoph Studer,et al.  Sameness: The regulatory crux with nanomaterial identity and grouping schemes for hazard assessment. , 2015, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[33]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  "ToxRTool", a new tool to assess the reliability of toxicological data. , 2009, Toxicology letters.

[34]  Alexander Amberg,et al.  EU framework 6 project: predictive toxicology (PredTox)--overview and outcome. , 2011, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[35]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Food for thought... on cell culture. , 2007, ALTEX.

[36]  Claudia Röhl,et al.  Manufactured nanomaterials: categorization and approaches to hazard assessment , 2014, Archives of Toxicology.

[37]  Bruno Hubesch,et al.  Workshop: use of "read-across" for chemical safety assessment under REACH. , 2013, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[38]  Sean Ekins,et al.  Towards a gold standard: regarding quality in public domain chemistry databases and approaches to improving the situation. , 2012, Drug discovery today.

[39]  Hao Zhu,et al.  Profiling Animal Toxicants by Automatically Mining Public Bioassay Data: A Big Data Approach for Computational Toxicology , 2014, PloS one.

[40]  Petko Alov,et al.  Molecular Modelling Study of the PPARγ Receptor in Relation to the Mode of Action/Adverse Outcome Pathway Framework for Liver Steatosis , 2014, International journal of molecular sciences.

[41]  Mardas Daneshian,et al.  Consensus report on the future of animal-free systemic toxicity testing. , 2014, ALTEX.

[42]  Dieter Lang,et al.  Predicting drug metabolism: experiment and/or computation? , 2015, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[43]  S. Enoch,et al.  Quantitative and mechanistic read across for predicting the skin sensitization potential of alkenes acting via Michael addition. , 2008, Chemical research in toxicology.

[44]  I. Cuthill,et al.  Reporting : The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research , 2010 .

[45]  Grace Patlewicz,et al.  Current and Future Perspectives on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of in Silico Approaches for Predicting Toxicity. , 2016, Chemical research in toxicology.

[46]  John R. Bucher,et al.  Systematic Review and Evidence Integration for Literature-Based Environmental Health Science Assessments , 2014, Environmental health perspectives.