Developing tools for defining and establishing pathways of toxicity

New approaches for toxicity testing: The US National Research Council report on ‘Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century’ (Krewski et al. 2010) envisioned a shift in testing away from studies of apical endpoints in test animals to the use of human cells to assess perturbations of toxicity pathways (TPs). The report generated widespread interest and has produced subsequent discussions regarding implementation of its key recommendations (Andersen and Krewski 2010; Krewski et al. 2011, 2014). TPs were defined as normal cellular signaling pathways that could serve as targets of toxicity in the face of perturbations of their function by chemical exposures. The examples provided in the report included sex steroid hormone receptor pathways, liver nuclear receptor signaling, and the suite of eight canonical stress pathways, including oxidative stress, DNA damage, heat shock, hypoxia, metal stress, inflammation, endoplasmic reticulum stress, and oxidative stress (Simmons et al. 2009). This aggregation of pathways, based largely on preexisting biological information, remains coarse-grained with many possible nodes in each of these TPs whose alterations could lead to toxicity. Some of the continuing challenges in advancing new, cell-based methods for toxicity testing are (1) the manner in which testing will be accomplished, (2) the degree of detail required to define the biological targets whose alterations lead to toxicity, and (3) the biological granularity underpinning definitions of toxicity pathways.

[1]  Yeyejide A. Adeleye,et al.  Implementing Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century (TT21C): Making safety decisions using toxicity pathways, and progress in a prototype risk assessment. , 2015, Toxicology.

[2]  Harvey J Clewell,et al.  A method to integrate benchmark dose estimates with genomic data to assess the functional effects of chemical exposure. , 2007, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[3]  D. Krewski,et al.  A Framework for the Next Generation of Risk Science , 2014, Environmental health perspectives.

[4]  Ruili Huang,et al.  Profiling of the Tox21 Chemical Collection for Mitochondrial Function to Identify Compounds that Acutely Decrease Mitochondrial Membrane Potential , 2014, Environmental health perspectives.

[5]  D. Pe’er,et al.  Module networks: identifying regulatory modules and their condition-specific regulators from gene expression data , 2003, Nature Genetics.

[6]  Harvey J Clewell,et al.  Can case study approaches speed implementation of the NRC report: "toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy?". , 2011, ALTEX.

[7]  Melvin E. Andersen,et al.  Incorporating New Technologies Into Toxicity Testing and Risk Assessment: Moving From 21st Century Vision to a Data-Driven Framework , 2013, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[8]  Howard J Federoff,et al.  Dysregulation of Gene Expression in the 1-Methyl-4-Phenyl-1,2,3,6-Tetrahydropyridine-Lesioned Mouse Substantia Nigra , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[9]  Steven K. Gibb Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy. , 2008, Reproductive toxicology.

[10]  Melvin E. Andersen,et al.  New directions in toxicity testing. , 2011, Annual review of public health.

[11]  Steven O Simmons,et al.  Cellular stress response pathway system as a sentinel ensemble in toxicological screening. , 2009, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[12]  Nir Friedman,et al.  Inferring Cellular Networks Using Probabilistic Graphical Models , 2004, Science.

[13]  Melvin E Andersen,et al.  A mechanistic redefinition of adverse effects - a key step in the toxicity testing paradigm shift. , 2010, ALTEX.

[14]  Nicola J. Rinaldi,et al.  Computational discovery of gene modules and regulatory networks , 2003, Nature Biotechnology.

[15]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Food for Thought ... on mapping the human toxome. , 2011, ALTEX.

[16]  Ruili Huang,et al.  Analysis of eight oil spill dispersants using rapid, in vitro tests for endocrine and other biological activity. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[17]  Mathieu Vinken,et al.  The adverse outcome pathway concept: a pragmatic tool in toxicology. , 2013, Toxicology.

[18]  Melvin E Andersen,et al.  A map of the PPARα transcription regulatory network for primary human hepatocytes. , 2014, Chemico-biological interactions.

[19]  David M. Reif,et al.  Profiling 976 ToxCast Chemicals across 331 Enzymatic and Receptor Signaling Assays , 2013, Chemical research in toxicology.

[20]  Robert J Kavlock,et al.  Integration of dosimetry, exposure, and high-throughput screening data in chemical toxicity assessment. , 2012, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[21]  Bruce C Allen,et al.  BMDExpress: a software tool for the benchmark dose analyses of genomic data , 2007, BMC Genomics.

[22]  Daniel Krewski,et al.  A Signal-to-Noise Crossover Dose as the Point of Departure for Health Risk Assessment , 2011, Environmental health perspectives.

[23]  T. Zacharewski,et al.  Integration of Genome-Wide Computation DRE Search, AhR ChIP-chip and Gene Expression Analyses of TCDD-Elicited Responses in the Mouse Liver , 2011, BMC Genomics.

[24]  Alexandra Maertens,et al.  MPTP’s Pathway of Toxicity Indicates Central Role of Transcription Factor SP1 , 2015, Archives of Toxicology.