The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Profiling Chemicals Based on Chronic Toxicity Results from the U.S. EPA ToxRef Database
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Thirty years of pesticide registration toxicity data have been historically stored as hardcopy and scanned documents by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A significant portion of these data have now been processed into standardized and structured toxicity data within the EPA's Toxicity Reference Database (ToxRefDB), including chronic, cancer, developmental, and reproductive studies from laboratory animals. These data are now accessible and mineable within ToxRefDB and are serving as a primary source of validation for U.S. EPA's ToxCast research program in predictive toxicology. OBJECTIVES: We profiled in vivo toxicities across 310 chemicals as a model application of ToxRefDB, meeting the need for detailed anchoring end points for development of ToxCast predictive signatures. METHODS: Using query and structured data-mining approaches, we generated toxicity profiles from ToxRefDB based on long-term rodent bioassays. These chronic/cancer data were analyzed for suitability as anchoring end points based on incidence, target organ, severity, potency, and significance. RESULTS: Under conditions of the bioassays, we observed pathologies for 273 of 310 chemicals, with greater preponderance (>90%) occurring in the liver, kidney, thyroid, lung, testis, and spleen. We observed proliferative lesions for 225 chemicals, and 167 chemicals caused progression to cancer-related pathologies. CONCLUSIONS: Based on incidence, severity, and potency, we selected 26 primarily tissue-specific pathology end points to uniformly classify the 310 chemicals. The resulting toxicity profile classifications demonstrate the utility of structuring legacy toxicity information and facilitating the computation of these data within ToxRefDB for ToxCast and other applications.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Fourches, D., Muratov, E., & Tropsha, A. (2010) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci100176x · Cited by 832
Judson, R. S., Houck, K. A., Kavlock, R. J., Knudsen, T. B., Martin, M. T., Mortensen, H. M., Reif, D. M., Rotroff, D. M., Shah, I., Richard, A. M., et al. (2010) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.0901392 · Cited by 608
Self-citationKavlock, R., Chandler, K., Houck, K., Hunter, S., Judson, R., Kleinstreuer, N., Knudsen, T., Martin, M., Padilla, S., Reif, D., et al. (2012) · Chemical Research in Toxicology · doi:10.1021/tx3000939 · Cited by 494
Self-citationJordan, S. A., Cunningham, D. G., & Marles, R. J. (2010) · Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.taap.2009.12.005 · Cited by 415
Metadata
- Authors
- Martin, M. T., Judson, R. S., Reif, D. M., Kavlock, R. J., & Dix, D. J.
- Venue
- Environmental Health Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 392-399
- ISSN
- 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-9924
- OpenAlex
- W2090058128
- Cited by
- 206
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Profiling Chemicals Based on Chronic Toxicity Results from the U.S. EPA ToxRef Database. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1289/ehp.0800074
- The paper
- Martin, M. T., Judson, R. S., Reif, D. M., Kavlock, R. J., & Dix, D. J. (2009). Profiling Chemicals Based on Chronic Toxicity Results from the U.S. EPA ToxRef Database. Environmental Health Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0800074
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.