Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31532525›Full record

ArticleToxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology2020

Utility of In Vitro Bioactivity as a Lower Bound Estimate of In Vivo Adverse Effect Levels and in Risk-Based Prioritization.

Katie Paul Friedman, Matthew Gagne, Lit-Hsin Loo, Panagiotis Karamertzanis, Tatiana Netzeva, Tomasz Sobanski, Jill A Franzosa, Ann M Richard, Ryan R Lougee, Andrea Gissi and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

131 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Incorporating a dermal absorption route into high throughput toxicokinetic modeling.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Application ofFrontiers in toxicology · 2026
    Review
  8. Review
  9. TheToxicology reports · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Cross-species comparisons of plasma binding and considerations for data evaluation.Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Advancing systemic toxicity risk assessment: Evaluation of a NAM-based toolbox approach.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

Katie Paul FriedmanNational Center for Computational Toxicology, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711.
Matthew GagneHealthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Government of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1A0K9.
Lit-Hsin LooInnovations in Food and Chemical Safety Programme and Bioinformatics Institute, Agency for Science, Technology and Research, Singapore, 138671, Singapore.
Panagiotis KaramertzanisComputational Assessment Unit, European Chemicals Agency, European Chemicals Agency Annankatu 18, P.O. Box 400, FI-00121 Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland.
Tatiana NetzevaComputational Assessment Unit, European Chemicals Agency, European Chemicals Agency Annankatu 18, P.O. Box 400, FI-00121 Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland.
Tomasz SobanskiComputational Assessment Unit, European Chemicals Agency, European Chemicals Agency Annankatu 18, P.O. Box 400, FI-00121 Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland.
Jill A FranzosaNational Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711.
Ann M RichardNational Center for Computational Toxicology, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711.
Ryan R LougeeNational Center for Computational Toxicology, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711.
Andrea GissiComputational Assessment Unit, European Chemicals Agency, European Chemicals Agency Annankatu 18, P.O. Box 400, FI-00121 Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland.
Jia-Ying Joey LeeInnovations in Food and Chemical Safety Programme and Bioinformatics Institute, Agency for Science, Technology and Research, Singapore, 138671, Singapore.
Michelle AngrishNational Center for Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 20004 and Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
Jean Lou DorneScientific Committee and Emerging Risks Unit Department of Risk Assessment and Scientific Assistance, Via Carlo Magno 1A, 43126 Parma, Italy.
Stiven FosterOffice of Land and Emergency Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 20004.
Kathleen RaffaeleOffice of Land and Emergency Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 20004.
Tina BahadoriOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA.
Maureen R GwinnNational Center for Computational Toxicology, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711.
Jason LambertNational Center for Computational Toxicology, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711.
Maurice WhelanEuropean Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Via Enrico Fermi, 2749, I - 21027 Ispra, Italy.
Mike RasenbergComputational Assessment Unit, European Chemicals Agency, European Chemicals Agency Annankatu 18, P.O. Box 400, FI-00121 Helsinki, Uusimaa, Finland.
Tara Barton-MaclarenHealthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Government of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1A0K9.
Russell S ThomasNational Center for Computational Toxicology, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Use of high-throughput, in vitro bioactivity data in setting a point-of-departure (POD) has the potential to accelerate the pace of human health safety evaluation by informing screening-level assessments. The primary objective of this work was to compare PODs based on high-throughput predictions of bioactivity, exposure predictions, and traditional hazard information for 448 chemicals. PODs derived from new approach methodologies (NAMs) were obtained for this comparison using the 50th (PODNAM, 50) and the 95th (PODNAM, 95) percentile credible interval estimates for the steady-state plasma concentration used in in vitro to in vivo extrapolation of administered equivalent doses. Of the 448 substances, 89% had a PODNAM, 95 that was less than the traditional POD (PODtraditional) value. For the 48 substances for which PODtraditional < PODNAM, 95, the PODNAM and PODtraditional were typically within a factor of 10 of each other, and there was an enrichment of chemical structural features associated with organophosphate and carbamate insecticides. When PODtraditional < PODNAM, 95, it did not appear to result from an enrichment of PODtraditional based on a particular study type (eg, developmental, reproductive, and chronic studies). Bioactivity:exposure ratios, useful for identification of substances with potential priority, demonstrated that high-throughput exposure predictions were greater than the PODNAM, 95 for 11 substances. When compared with threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) values, the PODNAM, 95 was greater than the corresponding TTC value 90% of the time. This work demonstrates the feasibility, and continuing challenges, of using in vitro bioactivity as a protective estimate of POD in screening-level assessments via a case study.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHazardous SubstancesHumansNo-Observed-Adverse-Effect LevelRisk AssessmentHazardous Substanceshigh-throughput screeninghigh-throughput toxicokineticsnew approach methodologiespoint-of-departure (POD)threshold of toxicological concern (TTC)

Identifiers

PMID31532525
PMCPMC7720780

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.