Documentation and Application of New Approach Methods in the Context of Regulatory Acceptance
Documentation and Application of New Approach Methods in the Context of Regulatory Acceptance
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2020
Authors
Editors
Journal ISSN
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliographical data
Publisher
Series
URI (citable link)
International patent number
Link to the license
EU project number
Project
Open Access publication
Collections
Title in another language
Publication type
Dissertation
Publication status
Published
Published in
Abstract
Most tests methods that are accepted by regulatory authorities to assess the safety and toxicity of chemicals are based on animal experimentation. However, animal testing is costly, time-and resource intensive. Animal studies often show low reproducibility and their predictive power for human safety has been questioned. In the past decades, there has been a substantial increase in the availability of new approach methods (NAMs) for evaluating chemical safety in an international regulatory context. This work aims to contribute to the development and application of NAMs to produce regulatorily valid data.
In the first publication, an easy-to-use tool for the analysis of concentration-response data was presented. This user-friendly software enables users without profound knowledge of statistics or programming to estimate benchmark concentrations and their confidence intervals. By the transparent documentation of the underlying algorithms, it is suitable for the application in a regulatory context.
The second publication arose within the work in the EU-ToxRisk consortium. When attempting to comply with the OECD GD 211 for the project’s test method documentation, it was found that some practical aspects were missing that were considered important by project partners. Also, some items listed there to be documented were interpreted differently by partners, leading to inconsistencies. Therefore, we developed an extensive guidance for test method descriptions, aligned to regulatory guidelines. The accordingly documented test methods were made available in a public knowledge data base. SOPs were deposited at the DB-ALM, the database for alternative test methods at the European Centre for Validation of Alternative Methods.
The third publication also emerged from the EU-ToxRisk project and documents a unified strategy for collaborative testing, detailing all procedures required to allow the NAM data to be usable for integrated hazard assessment, strategic project decisions and/or for regulatory purposes. Data formats and processing pipelines have been established, and test methods have been evaluated for their robustness, sensitivity and throughput. The strategy has been exemplified by using a panel of >20 test methods (with > 50 individual endpoints), each exposed to a set of 19 well-characterized, data-rich compounds.
The paradigm shift away from animal-based toxicity testing towards mechanism-oriented, predictive approaches applying alternative in vitro, in silico and in chemico methods requires in-tensive dissemination and communication efforts. Therefore, this thesis aims to contribute to the development of NAMs that can be used for toxicity testing in a regulatory context.
In the first publication, an easy-to-use tool for the analysis of concentration-response data was presented. This user-friendly software enables users without profound knowledge of statistics or programming to estimate benchmark concentrations and their confidence intervals. By the transparent documentation of the underlying algorithms, it is suitable for the application in a regulatory context.
The second publication arose within the work in the EU-ToxRisk consortium. When attempting to comply with the OECD GD 211 for the project’s test method documentation, it was found that some practical aspects were missing that were considered important by project partners. Also, some items listed there to be documented were interpreted differently by partners, leading to inconsistencies. Therefore, we developed an extensive guidance for test method descriptions, aligned to regulatory guidelines. The accordingly documented test methods were made available in a public knowledge data base. SOPs were deposited at the DB-ALM, the database for alternative test methods at the European Centre for Validation of Alternative Methods.
The third publication also emerged from the EU-ToxRisk project and documents a unified strategy for collaborative testing, detailing all procedures required to allow the NAM data to be usable for integrated hazard assessment, strategic project decisions and/or for regulatory purposes. Data formats and processing pipelines have been established, and test methods have been evaluated for their robustness, sensitivity and throughput. The strategy has been exemplified by using a panel of >20 test methods (with > 50 individual endpoints), each exposed to a set of 19 well-characterized, data-rich compounds.
The paradigm shift away from animal-based toxicity testing towards mechanism-oriented, predictive approaches applying alternative in vitro, in silico and in chemico methods requires in-tensive dissemination and communication efforts. Therefore, this thesis aims to contribute to the development of NAMs that can be used for toxicity testing in a regulatory context.
Summary in another language
Subject (DDC)
570 Biosciences, Biology
Keywords
Testing, New Approach Methods
Conference
Review
undefined / . - undefined, undefined. - (undefined; undefined)
Cite This
ISO 690
KREBS, Alice, 2020. Documentation and Application of New Approach Methods in the Context of Regulatory Acceptance [Dissertation]. Konstanz: University of KonstanzBibTex
@phdthesis{Krebs2020Docum-52550, year={2020}, title={Documentation and Application of New Approach Methods in the Context of Regulatory Acceptance}, author={Krebs, Alice}, address={Konstanz}, school={Universität Konstanz} }
RDF
<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/52550"> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-01-25T11:48:19Z</dcterms:available> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Most tests methods that are accepted by regulatory authorities to assess the safety and toxicity of chemicals are based on animal experimentation. However, animal testing is costly, time-and resource intensive. Animal studies often show low reproducibility and their predictive power for human safety has been questioned. In the past decades, there has been a substantial increase in the availability of new approach methods (NAMs) for evaluating chemical safety in an international regulatory context. This work aims to contribute to the development and application of NAMs to produce regulatorily valid data.<br />In the first publication, an easy-to-use tool for the analysis of concentration-response data was presented. This user-friendly software enables users without profound knowledge of statistics or programming to estimate benchmark concentrations and their confidence intervals. By the transparent documentation of the underlying algorithms, it is suitable for the application in a regulatory context.<br />The second publication arose within the work in the EU-ToxRisk consortium. When attempting to comply with the OECD GD 211 for the project’s test method documentation, it was found that some practical aspects were missing that were considered important by project partners. Also, some items listed there to be documented were interpreted differently by partners, leading to inconsistencies. Therefore, we developed an extensive guidance for test method descriptions, aligned to regulatory guidelines. The accordingly documented test methods were made available in a public knowledge data base. SOPs were deposited at the DB-ALM, the database for alternative test methods at the European Centre for Validation of Alternative Methods.<br />The third publication also emerged from the EU-ToxRisk project and documents a unified strategy for collaborative testing, detailing all procedures required to allow the NAM data to be usable for integrated hazard assessment, strategic project decisions and/or for regulatory purposes. Data formats and processing pipelines have been established, and test methods have been evaluated for their robustness, sensitivity and throughput. The strategy has been exemplified by using a panel of >20 test methods (with > 50 individual endpoints), each exposed to a set of 19 well-characterized, data-rich compounds.<br />The paradigm shift away from animal-based toxicity testing towards mechanism-oriented, predictive approaches applying alternative in vitro, in silico and in chemico methods requires in-tensive dissemination and communication efforts. Therefore, this thesis aims to contribute to the development of NAMs that can be used for toxicity testing in a regulatory context.</dcterms:abstract> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/52550"/> <dc:contributor>Krebs, Alice</dc:contributor> <dc:creator>Krebs, Alice</dc:creator> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-01-25T11:48:19Z</dc:date> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/52550/3/Krebs_2-1gs8bhelsjtr49.pdf"/> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/28"/> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights> <dcterms:title>Documentation and Application of New Approach Methods in the Context of Regulatory Acceptance</dcterms:title> <dcterms:issued>2020</dcterms:issued> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/52550/3/Krebs_2-1gs8bhelsjtr49.pdf"/> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/28"/> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>
Internal note
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Examination date of dissertation
October 26, 2020
University note
Konstanz, Univ., Doctoral dissertation, 2020
Method of financing
Comment on publication
Alliance license
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
International Co-Authors
Bibliography of Konstanz
Yes