IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v29y2009i4p474-479.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: Implications for Human Health Risk Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Krewski
  • Melvin E. Andersen
  • Ellen Mantus
  • Lauren Zeise

Abstract

At the request of the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Research Council (NRC) recently completed a major report entitled Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy. The terms of reference for this report were to develop a long‐range vision and strategic plan to advance the practices of toxicity testing and human health assessment of environmental agents. The report describes how current and anticipated scientific advances can be expected to transform toxicity testing to permit broader coverage of the universe of potentially toxic chemicals to which humans may be exposed, using more timely and more cost‐effective methods for toxicity testing. The report envisages greatly expanded use of high‐ and medium‐throughput in vitro screening assays, computational toxicology, and systems biology, along with other emerging high‐content testing methodologies, such as functional genomics and transcriptomics. When fully implemented, the vision will transform the ways toxicity testing and chemical risk assessment are conducted, moving away from measuring apical health endpoints in experimental animals toward identification of significant perturbations of toxicity pathways using in vitro tests in human cells and cell lines. Population‐based studies incorporating relevant biomarkers will also be useful in identifying pathway perturbations directly in humans and in interpreting the results of in vitro tests in the context of human health risk assessment. The present article summarizes and extends the NRC report and examines its implications for risk assessment practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Krewski & Melvin E. Andersen & Ellen Mantus & Lauren Zeise, 2009. "Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: Implications for Human Health Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 474-479, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:29:y:2009:i:4:p:474-479
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01150.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01150.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01150.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel Krewski & Melvin E. Andersen & Ellen Mantus & Lauren Zeise, 2009. "Reply to Invited Commentaries on Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: Implications for Human Health Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 492-497, April.
    2. Joyce S. Tsuji & Michael R. Garry, 2009. "Advances in Toxicity Testing Herald Improvements and Challenges for Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 490-491, April.
    3. Peter M. J. Bos & Stefania Gottardo & Janeck J. Scott-Fordsmand & Martie Van Tongeren & Elena Semenzin & Teresa F. Fernandes & Danail Hristozov & Kerstin Hund-Rinke & Neil Hunt & Muhammad-Adeel Irfan , 2015. "The MARINA Risk Assessment Strategy: A Flexible Strategy for Efficient Information Collection and Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-15, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:29:y:2009:i:4:p:474-479. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.