There is a pressing need to increase the efficiency and reliability of toxicological safety assessment for protecting human health and the environment. Although conventional toxicology tests rely on measuring apical changes in vertebrate models, there is increasing interest in the use of molecular information from animal and in vitro studies to inform safety assessment. One promising and pragmatic application of molecular information involves the derivation of transcriptomic points of departure (tPODs). Transcriptomic analyses provide a snapshot of global molecular changes that reflect cellular responses to stressors and progression toward disease. A tPOD identifies the dose level below which a concerted change in gene expression is not expected in a biological system in response to a chemical. A common approach to derive such a tPOD consists of modeling the dose–response behavior for each gene independently and then aggregating the gene-level data into a single tPOD. Although different implementations of this approach are possible, as discussed in this manuscript, research strongly supports the overall idea that reference doses produced using tPODs are health protective. An advantage of this approach is that tPODs can be generated in shorter term studies (e.g. days) compared with apical endpoints from conventional tests (e.g. 90-d subchronic rodent tests). Moreover, research strongly supports the idea that reference doses produced using tPODs are health protective. Given the potential application of tPODs in regulatory toxicology testing, rigorous and reproducible wet and dry laboratory methodologies for their derivation are required. This review summarizes the current state of the science regarding the study design and bioinformatics workflows for tPOD derivation. We identify standards of practice and sources of variability in tPOD generation, data gaps, and areas of uncertainty. We provide recommendations for research to address barriers and promote adoption in regulatory decision making.

Multiple in vivo test guidelines focusing on the estrogen, androgen, thyroid, and steroidogenesis pathways have been developed and validated for mammals, amphibians, or fish. However, these tests are resource-intensive and often use a large number of laboratory animals. Developing alternatives for in vivo tests is consistent with the replacement, reduction, and refinement principles for animal welfare considerations, which are supported by increasing mandates to move toward an “animal-free” testing paradigm worldwide. New approach methodologies (NAMs) hold great promise to identify molecular, cellular, and tissue changes that can be used to predict effects reliably and more efficiently at the individual level (and potentially on populations) while reducing the number of animals used in (eco)toxicological testing for endocrine disruption. In a collaborative effort, experts from government, academia, and industry met in 2020 to discuss the current challenges of testing for endocrine activity assessment for fish and amphibians. Continuing this cross-sector initiative, our review focuses on the current state of the science regarding the use of NAMs to identify chemical-induced endocrine effects. The present study highlights the challenges of using NAMs for safety assessment and what work is needed to reduce their uncertainties and increase their acceptance in regulatory processes. We have reviewed the current NAMs available for endocrine activity assessment including in silico, in vitro, and eleutheroembryo models. New approach methodologies can be integrated as part of a weight-of-evidence approach for hazard or risk assessment using the adverse outcome pathway framework. The development and utilization of NAMs not only allows for replacement, reduction, and refinement of animal testing but can also provide robust and fit-for-purpose methods to identify chemicals acting via endocrine mechanisms. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:757–777. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Botanical dietary supplement use is widespread and growing, therefore, ensuring the safety of botanical products is a public health priority. This commentary describes the mission and objectives of the Botanical Safety Consortium (BSC) - a public-private partnership aimed at enhancing the toolkit for conducting the safety evaluation of botanicals. This partnership is the result of a Memorandum of Understanding between the US FDA, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute. The BSC serves as a global forum for scientists from government, academia, consumer health groups, industry, and non-profit organizations to work collaboratively on adapting and integrating new approach methodologies (NAMs) into routine botanical safety assessments. The objectives of the BSC are to: 1) engage with a group of global stakeholders to leverage scientific safety approaches; 2) establish appropriate levels of chemical characterization for botanicals as complex mixtures; 3) identify pragmatic, fit-for-purpose NAMs to evaluate botanical safety; 4) evaluate the application of these tools via comparison to the currently available safety information on selected botanicals; 5) and integrate these tools into a framework that can facilitate the evaluation of botanicals. Initially, the BSC is focused on oral exposure from dietary supplements, but this scope could be expanded in future phases of work. This commentary provides an overview of the structure, goals, and strategies of this initiative and insights regarding our first objectives, namely the selection and prioritization of botanicals based on putative toxicological properties.

There is growing recognition across broad sectors of the scientific community that use of genomic biomarkers has the potential to reduce the need for conventional rodent carcinogenicity studies of industrial chemicals, agrochemicals, and pharmaceuticals through a weight-of-evidence approach. These biomarkers fall into 2 major categories: (1) sets of gene transcripts that can identify distinct tumorigenic mechanisms of action; and (2) cancer driver gene mutations indicative of rapidly expanding growth-advantaged clonal cell populations. This call-to-action article describes a collaborative approach launched to develop and qualify biomarker gene expression panels that measure widely accepted molecular pathways linked to tumorigenesis and their activation levels to predict tumorigenic doses of chemicals from short-term exposures. Growing evidence suggests that application of such biomarker panels in short-term exposure rodent studies can identify both tumorigenic hazard and tumorigenic activation levels for chemical-induced carcinogenicity. In the future, this approach will be expanded to include methodologies examining mutations in key cancer driver gene mutation hotspots as biomarkers of both genotoxic and nongenotoxic chemical tumor risk. Analytical, technical, and biological validation studies of these complementary genomic tools are being undertaken by multisector and multidisciplinary collaborative teams within the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute. Success from these efforts will facilitate the transition from current heavy reliance on conventional 2-year rodent carcinogenicity studies to more rapid animal- and resource-sparing approaches for mechanism-based carcinogenicity evaluation supporting internal and regulatory decision-making.

Next Generation Risk Assessment (NGRA) aims to improve safety testing of pharmaceuticals, agrochemicals, and industrial chemicals. NGRA employs new approach methodologies, such as novel in vitro assays coupled with exposure modeling, to minimize the use of animal models, which can fail to predict specific biological effects in humans. The strategy of the ‘Omics for Assessing Signatures for Integrated Safety (OASIS) Consortium combines multi-omics technologies (including transcriptomics, proteomics, and Cell Painting [high-content imaging]) and multiple cell model systems (ranging from simple cell cultures to complex organotypic models). By integrating these approaches with internal exposure estimates, the consortium aims to improve the translation between in vitro and in vivo test systems, ultimately enhancing the relevance of safety assessment to human biology. OASIS’s integrated approach aims to better translate the biological effects across different chemical and biological spaces, starting with the liver as a use case. By using compounds with well-characterized in vivo and in vitro nonclinical safety and toxicology data related to adverse organ-specific effects in rats and humans, OASIS aims to create novel integrated methods that improve safety assessment while reducing animal use. Ideally, these efforts will contribute to regulatory science across sectors and support the adoption of more predictive, efficient, and cost-effective toxicological models.