ArticleArchives of toxicology2026
Applicability of next-generation risk assessment generic PBK models and their performance within the chemical domain.
Article in Archives of toxicology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physiologically based kinetic (PBK) models are a cornerstone of in vitro to in vivo extrapolation and are therefore central to next-generation risk assessment (NGRA). This study assesses the performance of a generic, high-throughput PBK model for 26 organic chemicals spanning a wide range of physicochemical properties. Model predictions based on standard in silico and in vitro input parameters were benchmarked against published, chemical-specific PBK models and in vivo kinetic data. Predicted plasma maximum concentrations (Cmax) were within tenfold of in vivo values for 50% of the chemicals and within threefold for 31%. Published PBK models generally showed closer agreement with in vivo Cmax, likely because they incorporate in vivo-derived kinetic parameters or chemical-specific kinetic processes. An analysis of the chemical space revealed a lipophilicity-dependent bias, where Cmax for lipophilic compounds tended to be underpredicted, whereas hydrophilic compounds were overpredicted. No other consistent trends were observed with respect to physicochemical or ADME descriptors, possibly reflecting the limited dataset size. Overall, while the generic PBK model workflow appears suitable for NGRA applications, the observed lipophilicity-dependent bias indicates that chemical-specific corrections or refinements may be required for more accurate predictions.
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.