Cited by 15Environmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyAnimal testing and alternativesCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment

Advancing In Vitro–In Vivo Extrapolations of Mechanism-Specific Toxicity Data Through Toxicokinetic Modeling

Brinkmann, Markus, Preuss, Thomas G., Hollert, Henner·2016·Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology

Abstract

International legislation, such as the European REACH regulation (registration, evaluation, authorization, and restriction of chemicals), mandates the assessment of potential risks of an ever-growing number of chemicals to the environment and human health. Although this legislation is considered one of the most important investments in consumer safety ever, the downside is that the current testing strategies within REACH rely on extensive animal testing. To address the ethical conflicts arising from these increased testing requirements, decision-makers, such as the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), are committed to Russel and Burch's 3R principle (i.e., reduction, replacement, refinement) by demanding that animal experiments should be substituted with appropriate alternatives whenever possible. A potential solution of this dilemma might be the application of in vitro bioassays to estimate toxic effects using cells or cellular components instead of whole organisms. Although such assays are particularly useful to assess potential mechanisms of toxic action, scientists require appropriate methods to extrapolate results from the in vitro level to the situation in vivo. Toxicokinetic models are a straightforward means of bridging this gap. The present chapter describes different available options for in vitro-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) of mechanism-specific effects focused on fish species and also reviews the implications of confounding factors during the conduction of in vitro bioassays and their influence on the optimal choice of different dose metrics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/10_2015_5015

Cites

121 of 121 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brinkmann, M., Preuss, T. G., & Hollert, H.
Affiliations
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • Bayer (Germany) (DE)
  • Tongji University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Brinkmann, Markus
  • Hollert, Henner
Venue
Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology
Published
2016
Volume
157
Pages
293-317
ISSN
  • 0724-6145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1616-8542
OpenAlex
W2520530891
Cited by
15
References
121
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
5.12
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Advances in biochemical engineering, biotechnology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Keywords
in vitro-in vivo extrapolation, toxicokinetic modeling, in vitro bioassay, alternatives to animal testing, 3Rs, REACH regulation, fish toxicity, dose metrics, confounding factors, aquatic ecotoxicology
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Assay, Computer Simulation, Environmental Pollutants, Europe, Models, Biological, Guidelines as Topic, Patch-Clamp Techniques, Toxicity Tests, Models, Animal, Toxicokinetics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review