FutureTox III: Bridges for Translation

Future Tox III, a Society of Toxicology Contemporary Concepts in Toxicology workshop, was held in November 2015. Building upon Future Tox I and II, Future Tox III was focused on developing the high throughput risk assessment paradigm and taking the science of in vitro data and in silico models forward to explore the question-what progress is being made to address challenges in implementing the emerging big-data toolbox for risk assessment and regulatory decision-making. This article reports on the outcome of the workshop including 2 examples of where advancements in predictive toxicology approaches are being applied within Federal agencies, where opportunities remain within the exposome and AOP domains, and how collectively the toxicology community across multiple sectors can continue to bridge the translation from historical approaches to Tox21 implementation relative to risk assessment and regulatory decision-making.

Lessons from Toxicology: Developing a 21st-Century Paradigm for Medical Research

Biomedical developments in the 21st century provide an unprecedented opportunity to gain a dynamic systems-level and human-specific understanding of the causes and pathophysiologies of disease. This understanding is a vital need, in view of continuing failures in health research, drug discovery, and clinical translation. The full potential of advanced approaches may not be achieved within a 20th-century conceptual framework dominated by animal models. Novel technologies are being integrated into environmental health research and are also applicable to disease research, but these advances need a new medical research and drug discovery paradigm to gain maximal benefits. We suggest a new conceptual framework that repurposes the 21st-century transition underway in toxicology. Human disease should be conceived as resulting from integrated extrinsic and intrinsic causes, with research focused on modern human-specific models to understand disease pathways at multiple biological levels that are analogous to adverse outcome pathways in toxicology. Systems biology tools should be used to integrate and interpret data about disease causation and pathophysiology. Such an approach promises progress in overcoming the current roadblocks to understanding human disease and successful drug discovery and translation. A discourse should begin now to identify and consider the many challenges and questions that need to be solved.

Lessons learned, challenges, and opportunities: the U.S. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed the Food Quality Protection Act and amended the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requiring the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to implement a screening program to investigate the potential of pesticide chemicals and drinking water contaminants to adversely affect endocrine pathways. Consequently, the EPA launched the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) to develop and validate estrogen, androgen, and thyroid (EAT) pathway screening assays and to produce standardized and harmonized test guidelines for regulatory application. In 2009, the EPA issued the first set of test orders for EDSP screening and a total of 50 pesticide actives and 2 inert ingredients have been evaluated using the battery of EDSP Tier 1 screening assays (i.e., five in vitro assays and six in vivo assays). To provide a framework for retrospective analysis of the data generated and to collect the insight of multiple stakeholders involved in the testing, more than 240 scientists from government, industry, academia, and non-profit organizations recently participated in a workshop titled "Lessons Learned, Challenges, and Opportunities: The U.S. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program." The workshop focused on the science and experience to date and was organized into three focal sessions: (a) Performance of the EDSP Tier 1 Screening Assays for Estrogen, Androgen, and Thyroid Pathways; (b) Practical Applications of Tier 1 Data; and (c) Indications and Opportunities for Future Endocrine Testing. A number of key learnings and recommendations related to future EDSP evaluations emanated from the collective sessions.

Evidence-based toxicology for the 21st century: opportunities and challenges

The Evidence-based Toxicology Collaboration (EBTC) was established recently to translate evidence-based approaches from medicine and health care to toxicology in an organized and sustained effort. The EBTC held a workshop on "Evidence-based Toxicology for the 21st Century: Opportunities and Challenges" in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA on January 24-25, 2012. The presentations largely reflected two EBTC priorities: to apply evidence-based methods to assessing the performance of emerging pathway-based testing methods consistent with the 2007 National Research Council report on "Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century" as well as to adopt a governance structure and work processes to move that effort forward. The workshop served to clarify evidence-based approaches and to provide food for thought on substantive and administrative activities for the EBTC. Priority activities include conducting pilot studies to demonstrate the value of evidence-based approaches to toxicology, as well as conducting educational outreach on these approaches.

Perspectives on validation of high-throughput assays supporting 21st century toxicity testing

In vitro high-throughput screening (HTS) assays are seeing increasing use in toxicity testing. HTS assays can simultaneously test many chemicals but have seen limited use in the regulatory arena, in part because of the need to undergo rigorous, time-consuming formal validation. Here we discuss streamlining the validation process, specifically for prioritization applications. By prioritization, we mean a process in which less complex, less expensive, and faster assays are used to prioritize which chemicals are subjected first to more complex, expensive, and slower guideline assays. Data from the HTS prioritization assays is intended to provide a priori evidence that certain chemicals have the potential to lead to the types of adverse effects that the guideline tests are assessing. The need for such prioritization approaches is driven by the fact that there are tens of thousands of chemicals to which people are exposed, but the yearly throughput of most guideline assays is small in comparison. The streamlined validation process would continue to ensure the reliability and relevance of assays for this application. We discuss the following practical guidelines: (1) follow current validation practice to the extent possible and practical; (2) make increased use of reference compounds to better demonstrate assay reliability and relevance; (3) de-emphasize the need for cross-laboratory testing; and (4) implement a web-based, transparent, and expedited peer review process.

EPA priorities for biologic markers research in environmental health

Recent advances in molecular and cellular biology allow for measurement of biologic events or substances that may provide markers of exposure, effect, or susceptibility in humans. The application of these new and emerging techniques to environmental health offers the possibility of significantly reducing the uncertainties that traditionally hamper risk assessments. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) health research program emphasizes the validation of appropriate biologic markers and their application to high-priority Agency issues. The rationale for EPA's biomarker research program is presented, and future research directions are discussed. Exposure biomarkers will receive most of the research emphasis in the near term, particularly body burden indicators of exposure to high-priority chemicals, such as benzene, ozone, selected heavy metals, and organophosphate pesticides. Research on effects biomarkers will attempt to validate the relationship between the observed biological effects and adverse health consequences in humans, especially for cancer, pulmonary toxicity, immunotoxicity, and reproductive/developmental toxicity.

Comparative genetic mapping of cellular rel sequences in man, mouse, and the domestic cat

We used in situ hybridization techniques to assign the human c-rel locus to the centromere-proximal portion of the short arm of chromosome 2 (2cent-2p13). We also determined the chromosomal location of c-rel sequences in the domestic cat and the laboratory mouse by using a human c-rel fragment to screen panels of rodent X cat and hamster X mouse somatic cell hybrid DNAs. The c-rel locus apparently maintains similar syntenic relationships with other known genetic markers in the human and cat, but displays different linkage relationships in the mouse.

Conserved chromosomal positions of dual domains of the ets protooncogene in cats, mice, and humans

The mammalian protooncogene homologue of the avian v-ets sequence from the E26 retrovirus consists of two sequentially distinct domains located on different chromosomes. Using somatic cell hybrid panels, we have mapped the mammalian homologue of the 5' v-ets-domain to chromosome 11 (ETS1) in man, to chromosome 9 (Ets-1) in mouse, and to chromosome D1 (ETS1) in the domestic cat. The mammalian homologue of the 3' v-ets domain was similarly mapped to human chromosome 21 (ETS2), to mouse chromosome 16 (Ets-2), and to feline chromosome C2 (ETS2). Both protooncogenes fell in syntenic groups of homologous linked loci that were conserved among the three species. The occurrence of two distinct functional protooncogenes and their conservation of linkage positions in the three mammalian orders indicate that these two genes have been separate since before the evolutionary divergence of mammals.

Summary of in-house EPA workshop to define research/technical support approaches in biotechnology

In summary. EPA is expanding its scientific capabilities in biotechnology in order to be able to provide better technical support for Agency decision-making. As part of this process, an in-house workshop was held to better define regulatory needs and necessary technical support. In building its program in biotechnology, emphasis will be placed on activities more related to the mission of EPA than that of any other Federal agency. Efforts will build upon past activities and will be coordinated with those of other Federal agencies. It is essential that EPA's scientific efforts in biotechnology be credible and defensible, and thus, its research plans will be subjected to expert peer review.