Cited by 16Animal testing and alternativesCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentAgricultural safety and regulations

The Use of Toxicokinetic Information for Setting Concentrations of In Vitro Toxicity Tests and for Interpreting Their Results: A Proposed Workflow

Landsiedel, Robert, Birk, Barbara, Demuth, Philipp, Fabian, Eric, Hewitt, Nicola J., Hollnagel, Heli Miriam, Scheel, Julia·2024·Applied In Vitro Toxicology

Abstract

Background:In vitro assays are increasingly used in the toxicological testing of chemicals. These use high concentrations and the only criteria to set an upper concentration are related to solubility and cytotoxicity or by a predefined concentration as a default. However, the top concentrations in vitro should also consider the equivalent dose in vivo. A concentration causing an effect in vitro that exceeds the internal concentration at a maximum external dose in vivo may not be relevant for toxicological assessment since the cellular effect observed in vitro cannot occur in vivo. Materials and Methods:To avoid this, we propose the use of measured or modelled toxicokinetic data to extrapolate the top dose in vivo to an upper concentration in vitro. This in vivo to in vitro dose extrapolation (IVIVE) uses pharmacokinetic/toxicokinetic modelling to yield an in vitro concentration (cmaxIVIVE) which reflects the internal dose at the maximum external dose in vivo. Results:The cmaxIVIVE can be used to (1) define a relevant upper concentration for the in vitro testing (integrated approach) and (2) interpret the results of an in vitro test, even if the top concentration exceeds the cmaxIVIVE (post hoc approach). We describe a workflow which uses solubility and cytotoxicity data, as well as in vivo and in vitro toxicokinetic data, to derive cmaxvivo or cmaxIVIVE to optimize the setting of the top concentration of a test substance in an in vitro test system. Finally, we demonstrate the…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/aivt.2023.0018

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Landsiedel, R., Birk, B., Demuth, P., Fabian, E., Hewitt, N. J., Hollnagel, H. M., & Scheel, J.
Affiliations
  • BASF (Germany) (DE)
  • SWS, Erzhausen, Germany.
  • Toxicology and Environmental Research and Consulting, Dow Europe, Horgen, Switzerland.
  • Röhm GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany.
Corresponding author
Landsiedel, Robert
Venue
Applied In Vitro Toxicology
Published
2024-03-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
15-26
ISSN
  • 2332-1512 (ISSN-L)
  • 2332-1539
OpenAlex
W4393036777
Cited by
16
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2
FWCI
8.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Applied In Vitro Toxicology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
Keywords
in vitro toxicity testing, toxicokinetics, internal dose, solubility, cytotoxicity, integrated approach, post-hoc explanation, dicamba, herbicides, toxicokinetic modeling

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