OECD/EFSA workshop on developmental neurotoxicity (DNT): the use of non-animal test methods for regulatory purposes
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
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.
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?
The assays of the DNT-IVB have demonstrated to fulfill readiness criteria to be fit-for-purpose for screening and prioritization and use within IATA.
“This also applies to the assays of the DNT-IVB, which have already demonstrated to fulfill readiness criteria to be fit-for-purpose for screening and prioritization and use within Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) (Fritsche et al., 2017; Bal-Price et al., 2018a; Smirnova et al., 2024).”
From Challenges and solutions in transitioning to animal-free standards: a comprehensive analysis of components in human cell-based developmental neurotoxicity assays (2026) · cites this paper as Fritsche et al., 2017
The integration of animal-free alternatives typically requires careful validation, including protocol adaptation, optimization of reagent concentrations, and confirmation of performance equivalence.
“Their integration, however, typically requires careful validation, including (Fritsche et al., 2017; Bal-Price et al., 2018a; Galbraith et al., 2018; Ritacco et al., 2018; van der Valk et al., 2018; Perez-Diaz et al., 2023; Pfeifer et al., 2024; Smirnova et al., 2024) protocol adaption, optimization of reagent concentrations, and confirmation of performance equivalence.”
From Challenges and solutions in transitioning to animal-free standards: a comprehensive analysis of components in human cell-based developmental neurotoxicity assays (2026) · cites this paper as Fritsche et al., 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- Harrill, J. A., Freudenrich, T. M., Robinette, B. L. and Mundy, W. R. (2011). Comparative sensitivity of human and rat neu- ral cultures to chemical-induced inhibition of neurite out- growth. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 256, 268-80. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.taap.2011.02.013 · DOI · Paper page
- He, X., Imanishi, S., Sone, H. et al. (2012). Effects of methyl- mercury exposure on neuronal differentiation of mouse and human embryonic stem cells. Toxicol Lett 212, 1-10. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2012.04.011 · DOI
- Hoelting, L., Klima, S., Karreman, C. et al. (2016). Stem cell- derived immature human dorsal root ganglia neurons to iden- tify peripheral neurotoxicants. Stem Cells Transl Med 5, 476- 487. https://doi.org/10.5966/sctm.2015-0108 · DOI
- Kaufmann, W. (2003). Current status of developmental neuro- toxicity: An industry perspective. Toxicol Lett 140, 161-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4274(02)00503-9 · DOI
- Krug, A. K., Balmer, N. V., Matt, F. et al. (2013). Evaluation of a human neurite growth assay as specific screen for develop- mental neurotoxicants. Arch Toxicol 87, 2215-2231. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00204-013-1072-y · DOI
- Lein, P., Silbergeld, E., Locke, P. and Goldberg, A. M. (2005). In vitro and other alternative approaches to developmental neurotoxicity testing (DNT). Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 19, 735-744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2004.12.035 · DOI
- Lein, P., Locke, P. and Goldberg, A. (2007). Meeting report: Alternatives for developmental neurotoxicity testing. Envi- ron Health Perspect 115, 764-768. https://doi.org/10.1289/ ehp.9841 · DOI
- Leist, M., Hartung, T. and Nicotera, P. (2008). The dawning of a new age of toxicology. ALTEX 25, 103-114. https://doi. org/10.14573/altex.2008.2.103 · DOI
- Leist, M., Hasiwa, N., Rovida, C. et al. (2014). Consensus re- port on the future of animal-free systemic toxicity testing. ALTEX 31, 341-356. https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.1406091 · DOI
- McConnell, E. R., McClain, M. A., Ross, J. et al. (2012). Evalu- ation of multi-well microelectrode arrays for neurotoxicity screening using a chemical training set. Neurotoxicology 33, 1048-1057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuro.2012.05.001 · DOI
- Mundy, W. R., Padilla, S., Breier, J. M. et al. (2015). Expanding the test set: Chemicals with potential to disrupt mammalian brain development. Neurotoxicol Teratol 52(Pt A), 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ntt.2015.10.001 · DOI
- NRC -National Research Council (2007). Toxicity Testing in the 21 st Century: A Vision and a Strategy. London: The Na- tional Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11970 · DOI
- Nyffeler, J., Karreman, C., Leisner, H. et al. (2016). Design of a high-throughput human neural crest cell migration assay to indicate potential developmental toxicants. ALTEX 34, 75-94. https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.1605031 · DOI
- Pamies, D., Bal-Price, A., Simeonov, A. et al. (2017). Good cell culture practice for stem cells and stem-cell-derived models. ALTEX 34, 95-132. https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.1607121 · DOI · Paper page
- Rempel, E., Hölting, L., Waldmann, T. et al. (2015). A transcrip- tome-based classifier to identify developmental toxicants by stem cell testing: Design, validation and optimization for Bal-Price, A., Crofton, K. M., Sachana, M. et al. (2015b). Puta- tive adverse outcome pathways relevant to neurotoxicity. Crit Rev Toxicol 45, 83-91. https://doi.org/10.3109/10408444.20 14.981331 · DOI
- Barenys, M., Gassmann, K., Baksmeier, C. et al. (2016). Epigal- locatechin gallate (EGCG) inhibits adhesion and migration of neural progenitor cells in vitro. Arch Toxicol, in press. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s00204-016-1709-8 · DOI
- Baumann, J., Gassmann, K., Masjosthusmann, S. et al. (2016). Comparative human and rat neurospheres reveal species dif- ferences in chemical effects on neurodevelopmental key events. Arch Toxicol 90, 1415-1427. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00204-015-1568-8 · DOI · Paper page
- Brown, J. P., Hall, D., Frank, C. L. et al. (2016). Evaluation of a microelectrode array-based assay for neural network ontog- eny using training set chemicals. Toxicol Sci 154, 126-139. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfw147 · DOI
- Coecke, S., Balls, M., Bowe, G. et al. (2005). Guidance on good cell culture practice. A report of the second ECVAM task force on good cell culture practice. Altern Lab Anim 33, 261- 287. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5476-1_49 · DOI
- Crofton, K. M., Mundy, W. R., Lein, P. J. et al. (2011). Devel- opmental neurotoxicity testing: Recommendations for devel- oping alternative methods for the screening and prioritiza- tion of chemicals. ALTEX 28, 9-15. https://doi.org/10.14573/ altex.2011.1.009 · DOI
- Culbreth, M. E., Harill, J. A., Freudenrich, T. M. et al. (2012). Comparison of chemical-induced changes in proliferation and apoptosis in human and mouse neuroprogenitor cells. Neurotoxicology 33, 1499-1510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. neuro.2012.05.012 · DOI
- Dorman, D. C., Allen, S. L., Byczkowski, J. Z. et al. (2001). Methods to identify and characterize developmental neuro- toxicity for human health risk assessment. III: Pharmacoki- netic and pharmacodynamic considerations. Environ Health Perspect 109, Suppl 1, 101-11. https://doi.org/10.1289/ ehp.01109s1101 · DOI
- Fritsche, E., Alm, H., Baumann, J. et al. (2015). Literature re- view on in vitro and alternative developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) testing methods. EFSA Support Publications 12, 4. https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2015.EN-778 · DOI
- Fritsche, E. (2016). Report on integrated testing strategies for the identification and evaluation of chemical hazards associ- ated with the developmental neurotoxicity (DNT). In Report of the OECD/EFSA workshop on developmental neurotoxic- ity (DNT): The use of non-animal test methods for regula- tory purposes. OECD Environment, Health and Safety Pub- lications Series on Testing and Assessment 242. ENV/JM/ MONO 63. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/12. FRITSCHE.pdf
- Gassmann, K., Abel, J., Bothe, H. et al. (2010). Species-specific differential AhR expression protects human neural progenitor cells against developmental neurotoxicity of PAHs. Environ Health Perspect 118, 1571-1577. https://doi.org/10.1289/ ehp.0901545 histone deacetylase inhibitors. Arch Toxicol 89, 1599-1618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-015-1573-y · DOI
- Smirnova, L., Hogberg, H. T., Leist, M. and Hartung, T. (2014). Developmental neurotoxicity -challenges in the 21 st century and in vitro opportunities. ALTEX 31, 129-156. https://doi. org/10.14573/altex.1403271 · DOI
- Stiegler, N. V., Krug, A. K., Matt, F. and Leist, M. (2011). As- sessment of chemical-induced impairment of human neurite outgrowth by multiparametric live cell imaging in high-den- sity cultures. Toxicol Sci 121, 73-87. https://doi.org/10.1093/ toxsci/kfr034 · DOI
- Tsuji, R. and Crofton, K. M. (2012). Developmental neurotox- icity guideline study: Issues with methodology, evaluation and regulation. Congenit Anom 52, 122-128. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1741-4520.2012.00374.x · DOI
- Valdivia, P., Martin, M., LeFew, W. R. et al. (2014). Multi-well microelectrode array recordings detect neuroactivity of Tox- Cast compounds. Neurotoxicology 44, 204-217. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.neuro.2014.06.012 · DOI
- Zimmer, B., Lee, G., Balmer, N. V. et al. (2012). Evaluation of developmental toxicants and signaling pathways in a functional test based on the migration of human neural crest cells. Environ Health Perspect 120, 1116-1122. https://doi. org/10.1289/ehp.1104489 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Blum, J., Masjosthusmann, S., Bartmann, K., Bendt, F., Dolde, X., Dönmez, A., Förster, N., Holzer, A.-K., Hübenthal, U., Keßel, H. E., et al. (2023) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.137035 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Self-citationHarrill, J. A., Freudenrich, T., Wallace, K., Ball, K., Shafer, T. J., & Mundy, W. R. (2018) · Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.taap.2018.04.001 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
https://www.altex.org/index.php/altex/article/view/1339
Krebs, A., Waldmann, T., Wilks, M. F., van Vugt-Lussenburg, B. M. A., van der Burg, B., Terron, A., Steger-Hartmann, T., Ruegg, J., Rovida, C., Pedersen, E., et al. (2019) · ALTEX · doi:10.14573/altex.1909271 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Self-citationSachana, M., Shafer, T. J., & Terron, A. (2021) · Biology · doi:10.3390/biology10020086 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Scientific Validation of Human Neurosphere Assays for Developmental Neurotoxicity Evaluation
Koch, K., Bartmann, K., Hartmann, J., Kapr, J., Klose, J., Kuchovská, E., Pahl, M., Schlüppmann, K., Zühr, E., & Fritsche, E. (2022) · Frontiers in Toxicology · doi:10.3389/ftox.2022.816370 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationSpänle, J. V., Haiber, L. M., & Seeger, B. (2026) · Frontiers in Toxicology · doi:10.3389/ftox.2026.1800157 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Fritsche, E.
- Venue
- ALTEX
- Publisher
- ALTEX Edition
- Published
- 2017
- Pages
- 311-315
- ISSN
- 1868-596X
- Cited by
- 78
- References
- 0
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
