Searching the Resource Information Network
Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.
A biological system is more than the sum of its parts - it accomplishes many functions via synergy. Deconstructing the system down to the molecular mechanism level necessitates the complement of reconstructing functions on all levels, i.e., in our conceptualization of biology and its perturbations, our experimental models and computer modelling. Toxicology contains the somewhat arbitrary subclass "systemic toxicities"; however, there is no relevant toxic insult or general disease that is not systemic. At least inflammation and repair are involved that require coordinated signaling mechanisms across the organism. However, the more body components involved, the greater the challenge to reca-pitulate such toxicities using non-animal models. Here, the shortcomings of current systemic testing and the development of alternative approaches are summarized. We argue that we need a systematic approach to integrating existing knowledge as exemplified by systematic reviews and other evidence-based approaches. Such knowledge can guide us in modelling these systems using bioengineering and virtual computer models, i.e., via systems biology or systems toxicology approaches. Experimental multi-organ-on-chip and microphysiological systems (MPS) provide a more physiological view of the organism, facilitating more comprehensive coverage of systemic toxicities, i.e., the perturbation on organism level, without using substitute organisms (animals). The next challenge is to establish disease models, i.e., micropathophysiological systems (MPPS), to expand their utility to encompass biomedicine. Combining computational and experimental systems approaches and the chal-lenges of validating them are discussed. The suggested 3S approach promises to leverage 21st century technology and systematic thinking to achieve a paradigm change in studying systemic effects.
Pubmed ID: 29677694
Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.
This website is an invitation. an invitation to join scientists and stakeholders in an effort to review the scientific basis of traditional toxicological risk assessment, to provide the toxicological community with the tools it needs to efficiently and transparently judge risks of a diversifying nature and to make toxicology thus fit to meet the challenges of the 21st century. an invitation to participate in the inception and continuous implementation of a new movement in toxicology that aims at adopting an evidence-based approach. an invitation to help bridging the gap between modern toxicological science and risk assessment in order to exploit the wealth of information from new technologies in modern life sciences & toxicological research and to arrive at informed, transparent, judicious and conscientious decisions made on the basis of all evidence available. an invitation to develop a framework that allows combining precious expert insight grown over years of practical experience with structured approaches in basic science, in method assessment and in decision-making. Such evidence-based toxicology might help to make the best possible use of all sources of evidence in an efficient, productive, reliable, acceptable and transparent manner. Why do we need evidence-based toxicology (EBT)? Toxicology and the delivery of effective safety assessment critically relies on concepts and understanding generated by basic scientific research and must therefore adapt constantly to advances in knowledge. However, particularly from the perspective of regulatory toxicology, some of the assessment paradigms and methodologies were established decades ago and have changed little in response to scientific progress. At the same time, changes in our understanding of human disease, changes in the types of product now requiring safety assessment, and changes in the legislative landscape and public expectations pose significant challenges for industry, academia and regulators alike. It is necessary to challenge the status quo and ensure that as a matter of course best scientific practice and technical sophistication is reflected in safety assessment practices such that current and future challenges can be met. It is important therefore to ensure that structures are available that will encourage, facilitate and support a process of critical appraisal and renewal of the toxicological repertoire available for safety assessment. Part of this process is to embrace evidence-based toxicology such that the best possible scientific evidence is applied to judge product safety and likely risks to human health.
View all literature mentions