The Evolution of Regulatory Toxicology: Where is the Gardener?

Landsiedel, Robert; Birk, Barbara; Funk-Weyer, Dorothee

doi:10.1177/02611929221107617

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 41 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If this multi-stakeholder endeavour is successful, there will come a point in time when the new system becomes mainstream while the current system is superseded. Building on the evolution metaphor ( Landsiedel et al, 2022 ), it is time to tend the “Regulatory Garden”.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a future regulatory framework for chemicals in the European Union – Chemicals 2.0

Berggren

Worth

2023

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a future regulatory framework for chemicals in the European Union – Chemicals 2.0

Berggren

Worth

2023

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This can support the identification of methods that will contribute to future regulatory landscapes (e.g. Landsiedel et al 2022).…”

Section: Role Of Grouping and Read-across In Increasing The Acceptanc...mentioning

confidence: 96%

A modular strategy for the testing and assessment of non-genotoxic carcinogens

Louekari,

Jacobs

2024

Arch Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A modular strategy is described for the testing and assessment (MoSt) of non-genotoxic carcinogenicity (NGTxC) that is suitable for regulatory applications. It utilizes and builds upon work conducted by the OECD expert group on NGTxC. The approach integrates relevant test methods from the molecular- to cellular- and further to tissue level, many of which have been recently reviewed. Six progressive modules are included in the strategy. Advice is provided for the iterative selection of the next appropriate test method within each step of the strategy. Assessment is completed by a weight of evidence conclusion, which integrates the different streams of modular information. The assessment method gives higher weight to findings that are mechanistically linked with biological relevance to carcinogenesis. With a focus on EU-REACH, and pending upon successful test method validation and acceptance, this will also enable the MoSt for NGTxC to be applied for regulatory purposes across different regulatory jurisdictions.

show abstract

“…In our 50th Anniversary Article this time, Landsiedel et al 1 make a thought-provoking point: that the methods and data accepted for toxicology testing and assessment encounter a process analogous to that of natural selection, and that this process might be already underway. The authors apply the concept of ‘evolutionary pressure’ to help us better understand the requirements of future toxicity testing.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial

Seabra

2022

Altern Lab Anim

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this year's fourth issue of ATLA, we have an impressively diverse set of papers, including a 50th Anniversary Article that leads us to reconsider a few notions, and several other papers that will be included in our Virtual Special Collection on Biobanking and the Use of Human Tissues. We are also pleased to announce the recipients of the Michael Balls Award 2021. These delighted winners are the authors of the paper in Volume 49 that the Associate Editors and Editorial Board of ATLA identified as potentially making the most significant contribution to the reduction, refinement and/or replacement of animal experimentation.In our 50th Anniversary Article this time, Landsiedel et al. 1 make a thought-provoking point: that the methods and data accepted for toxicology testing and assessment encounter a process analogous to that of natural selection, and that this process might be already underway. The authors apply the concept of 'evolutionary pressure' to help us better understand the requirements of future toxicity testing. They acknowledge that current regulatory restrictions were created with animal data in mind, where such data fit in perfectly, leaving little room for new approach methodologies (NAMs) to survive and thrive in a regulatory environment that is 'hostile' to them. However, extinction events occur and that will also be the case for the methods used for toxicity assessments: some toxicity assessment methods will be relevant enough to persist, while others will stop being used and disappear. The regulatory landscape is not static and can be managed and changed (i.e. it is akin to a garden, rather than a natural habitat). Thus, it could potentially be managed to make it a better fit for NAMs. The authors suggest that academia, industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), regulators and legislators could act collaboratively as 'gardeners' and shape a regulatory landscape in which NAMs can thrive.Science relies on incremental progress and change happens all the time. In this context, human tissue-based methods appear to be adapting and surviving rather well. Many researchers are keen to make the most of human tissues directly or through data sets stored in online repositoriesfor example, human cells can be used to create reconstituted human airway tissues, which represent important experimental tools to assess functional endpoints in respiratory toxicology. Behrsing and colleagues 2 discussed the need for method standardisation in respiratory toxicology at a workshop, which led to a multi-laboratory

show abstract

The Evolution of Regulatory Toxicology: Where is the Gardener?

Cited by 9 publications

References 41 publications

Towards a future regulatory framework for chemicals in the European Union – Chemicals 2.0

Towards a future regulatory framework for chemicals in the European Union – Chemicals 2.0

A modular strategy for the testing and assessment of non-genotoxic carcinogens

Editorial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About