ReviewPharmaceutical biology2025
From Vision to Reality: Five Years of the Botanical Safety Consortium.
Review in Pharmaceutical biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A screening strategy for identifying the developmental and reproductive toxicity potential of botanicals.Pharmaceutical biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextBotanicals, including products derived from plants, fungi, and algae, are increasingly consumed worldwide. Their complex compositions and variable phytochemical profiles present significant challenges for safety assessment. Traditional toxicology methods are time and resource intensive, and the variability of botanicals makes it difficult to test one lot as representative.
objectiveThe Botanical Safety Consortium (BSC), launched in 2019, was established to advance fit-for-purpose toxicity testing strategies for botanicals. This manuscript summarizes the progress of the BSC, with emphasis on the activities of its Working Groups.
methodsThe BSC Working Groups evaluate established new approach methodologies (NAMs), including
resultsThe evaluations address toxicological endpoints such as hepatotoxicity, genotoxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, neurotoxicity, cardiotoxicity, and dermal toxicity. Early findings have identified fit-for-purpose screening tools that can generally be applied to botanical testing, with some nuances and considerations.
conclusionFuture work will focus on refining and enhancing the tool-kit through assay refinement, filling endpoint gaps with additional assays, and incorporating ADME data and in silico modeling approaches. This collaborative, science-driven framework aims to modernize botanical safety evaluation, address regulatory needs, and ultimately protect public health while supporting the global demand for botanical-based dietary supplements, cosmetics, and other products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.