Food for thought ... considerations and guidelines for basic test method descriptions in toxicology

Summary -phenylpyridinium (MPP + ). Different lentiviral constructs then were tested: cells labeled ubiquitously with green (GFP) or red fluorescent protein (RFP) allowed the quantification of neurite growth and of its disturbance by toxicants; expression of proteins of interest could be targeted to different organelles; production of two different proteins from a single read-through construct was achieved successfully by an expression strategy using a linker peptide between the two proteins, which is cleaved by deubiquitinases; LUHMES, labeled with GFP in the cytosol and RFP in the mitochondria

show abstract

“…Toxicological data were confirmed in independent biological experiments (Leist et al, 2010. Values are expressed as the means ±SD (n ≥3).…”

Section: Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Generation of genetically-modified human differentiated cells for toxicological tests and the study of neurodegenerative diseases

Schildknecht

Karreman

Pöltl

et al. 2013

ALTEX

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A culture of stringent validation has been developed for such approaches (Leist et al, 2010(Leist et al, , 2012a, while the quality and usefulness of animal experiments have been little scrutinized. A new study (Seok et al, 2013) …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

REPRINT: Inflammatory findings on species extrapolations: humans are definitely no 70-kg mice 1

Leist

Hartung

2013

ALTEX

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Our attempts to establish Good Cell Culture Practice (GCCP) (Coecke et al, 2005) and publication guidance for in vitro studies (Leist et al, 2010) desperately await broader implementation (see below). Earlier, we have discussed the shortcomings of typical cell cultures (Hartung, 2007(Hartung, , 2013.…”

Section: Poor Basic Research and Publication Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of toxicological science: the need for change

Hartung

2017

IJRAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolution requires change but the field of toxicology has not kept pace. The top ten problems urging change are: 1) disparity of testing requirements and risk acceptance for different products and geographical areas; 2) throughput and testing costs versus testing needs; 3) limited predictivity for humans; 4) precautionary approaches from drug development adapted to other areas; 5) animal use; 6) traditional tests unsuitable for new products; 7) lack of coverage for new hazards; 8) failure to address mixtures of toxicants; 9) lack of coverage for individual susceptibilities and vulnerable subpopulations; 10) poor basic research and publication standards. The intransigence at the root of these problems is discussed with reference to current international toxicological policies and methods. For each, the limitations are reviewed with reference to key literature. While current approaches are still needed, there is room for substantial change. To meet the challenges of the 21st century, revolution rather than evolution is required.

show abstract

Food for thought ... considerations and guidelines for basic test method descriptions in toxicology

Cited by 63 publications

References 56 publications

Generation of genetically-modified human differentiated cells for toxicological tests and the study of neurodegenerative diseases

Generation of genetically-modified human differentiated cells for toxicological tests and the study of neurodegenerative diseases

REPRINT: Inflammatory findings on species extrapolations: humans are definitely no 70-kg mice 1

Evolution of toxicological science: the need for change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About