Cited by 164Drug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and ProtectionMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesAnimal testing and alternatives

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prediction of liver toxicity and mode of action using metabolomics in vitro in HepG2 cells

Open access

Abstract

Liver toxicity is a leading systemic toxicity of drugs and chemicals demanding more human-relevant, high throughput, cost effective in vitro solutions. In addition to contributing to animal welfare, in vitro techniques facilitate exploring and understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying toxicity. New 'omics technologies can provide comprehensive information on the toxicological mode of action of compounds, as well as quantitative information about the multi-parametric metabolic response of cellular systems in normal and patho-physiological conditions. Here, we combined mass-spectroscopy metabolomics with an in vitro liver toxicity model. Metabolite profiles of HepG2 cells treated with 35 test substances resulted in 1114 cell supernatants and 3556 intracellular samples analyzed by metabolomics. Control samples showed relative standard deviations of about 10-15%, while the technical replicates were at 5-10%. Importantly, this procedure revealed concentration-response effects and patterns of metabolome changes that are consistent for different liver toxicity mechanisms (liver enzyme induction/inhibition, liver toxicity and peroxisome proliferation). Our findings provide evidence that identifying organ toxicity can be achieved in a robust, reliable, human-relevant system, representing a non-animal alternative for systemic toxicology.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00204-017-2079-6

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • HepG2 is suitable for studying general mechanisms of cytotoxicity and cellular stress response but limited for quantitative prediction of metabolism and biotransformation of many compounds.

    “Recent reviews and experimental studies directly interpret HepG2 as a model suitable for solving certain toxicological problems, in particular for studying general mechanisms of cytotoxicity and cellular stress response (e.g., activation of transcription factors activator protein-1 (AP1), p53, nuclear factor-erythroid 2 related factor 2 (Nrf2), and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB)) [109,110,111],”

    From The HepG2 Cell Line as a Model for Studying Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (2026) · cites this paper as [110]

    The Results section (page not provided) describes HepG2 as a robust in vitro model and reports metabolite changes associated with cytotoxicity and specific toxicity mechanisms. The Discussion notes its limited metabolic capacity. However, the cited paper does not establish the sentence’s specific claim about studying cellular stress responses through AP1, p53, Nrf2, or NF-κB activation. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. HSE (1992) Evaluation on: fluoroglycofen-ethyl. May 1992. Issue No. 50. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Pesticides Safety Directorate, UK

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ramirez, T., Strigun, A., Verlohner, A., Huener, H.-A., Peter, E., Herold, M., Bordag, N., Mellert, W., Walk, T., Spitzer, M., Jiang, X., Sperber, S., Hofmann, T., Hartung, T., Kamp, H., & van Ravenzwaay, B.
Affiliations
BASF (Germany) (DE)
Corresponding author
Hofmann, Thomas
Venue
Archives of Toxicology
Published
2017-09-30
Volume
92
Issue
2
Pages
893-906
ISSN
  • 0340-5761 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0738
OpenAlex
W2759884959
Cited by
164
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 1
FWCI
13.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Toxicology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Drug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and Protection
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Metabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
Keywords
hepatotoxicity, metabolomics, HepG2 cells, in vitro toxicity models, mechanism of action, non-animal alternatives, liver enzyme induction, liver enzyme inhibition, peroxisome proliferation, concentration-dependent effects, intracellular metabolites, mass spectrometry metabolomics
MeSH terms
Animal Testing Alternatives, Enzyme Induction, Humans, Liver, Toxicity Tests, Metabolomics, Metabolome, Hep G2 Cells

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