Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41332006›Full record

ReviewJournal of veterinary science2025

Alternative methods for developmental toxicity testing: features, status and future directions.

Inho Hwang, Eui-Bae Jeung

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of veterinary science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Inho HwangLaboratory of Veterinary Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2039-3895
Eui-Bae JeungLaboratory of Veterinary Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea. ebjeung@chungbuk.ac.kr.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8936-916X

Funding

Chungbuk National UniversityNational Research Foundation of Korea 2021R1A2C2093275
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceThe developmental stage begins with implantation of a fertilized egg, followed by continuous cell division and differentiation to produce a complete organism. Developmental toxicity involves adverse effects that may be irreversible or undetectable until significant damage occurs, especially during early development, and must be assessed for drug and chemical safety. Animal tests face limitations such as cost, ethics, and species differences, prompting demand for alternatives. This review examines current alternative methods, institutional efforts, and future directions. OBSERVATIONS: Recent advances have led to the use of various new approach methodologies to replace or complement animal testing. The embryoid body test now allows for faster and more reproducible assessment of early developmental toxicity, while organoids are being applied to evaluate organ-specific toxicities, such as neurodevelopmental and cardiac effects. Zebrafish offer validated endpoints for morphological and behavioral evaluation, enhancing their regulatory relevance. Predictive models, including those based on machine learning, are being integrated with CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Alternative methods provide ethical and rational approaches to developmental toxicity assessment. When integrated into regulatory science, they can contribute to early safety decisions in clinical development and public health. Coordinated efforts by stakeholders in technology advancement, implementation support, and guideline revision are essential for broader adoption.

Indexed as

Animal Testing AlternativesToxicity TestsAnimalsEmbryonic DevelopmentZebrafishbiological assaycomputational biologyIn vitro techniquesorganoidsrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID41332006
PMCPMC12703931

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.