pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Applying genomics in regulatory toxicology: a report of the ECETOC workshop on omics threshold on non-adversity - PubMed

Applying genomics in regulatory toxicology: a report of the ECETOC workshop on omics threshold on non-adversity

Timothy W Gant et al. Arch Toxicol. 2023 Aug.

Abstract

In a joint effort involving scientists from academia, industry and regulatory agencies, ECETOC's activities in Omics have led to conceptual proposals for: (1) A framework that assures data quality for reporting and inclusion of Omics data in regulatory assessments; and (2) an approach to robustly quantify these data, prior to interpretation for regulatory use. In continuation of these activities this workshop explored and identified areas of need to facilitate robust interpretation of such data in the context of deriving points of departure (POD) for risk assessment and determining an adverse change from normal variation. ECETOC was amongst the first to systematically explore the application of Omics methods, now incorporated into the group of methods known as New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), to regulatory toxicology. This support has been in the form of both projects (primarily with CEFIC/LRI) and workshops. Outputs have led to projects included in the workplan of the Extended Advisory Group on Molecular Screening and Toxicogenomics (EAGMST) group of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and to the drafting of OECD Guidance Documents for Omics data reporting, with potentially more to follow on data transformation and interpretation. The current workshop was the last in a series of technical methods development workshops, with a sub-focus on the derivation of a POD from Omics data. Workshop presentations demonstrated that Omics data developed within robust frameworks for both scientific data generation and analysis can be used to derive a POD. The issue of noise in the data was discussed as an important consideration for identifying robust Omics changes and deriving a POD. Such variability or "noise" can comprise technical or biological variation within a dataset and should clearly be distinguished from homeostatic responses. Adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) were considered a useful framework on which to assemble Omics methods, and a number of case examples were presented in illustration of this point. What is apparent is that high dimension data will always be subject to varying processing pipelines and hence interpretation, depending on the context they are used in. Yet, they can provide valuable input for regulatory toxicology, with the pre-condition being robust methods for the collection and processing of data together with a comprehensive description how the data were interpreted, and conclusions reached.

Keywords: ECETOC; PODS; Transcriptomics; Workshop.

© 2023. Crown.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Progress from the initial concept to the Omics reporting framework and optimal data analysis framework. Shown in yellow is the understanding and interpretation that has been outside this area of activity but recognised as an area requiring focus going forward

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Pathways to regulatory adoption derived from a diagram by Carole Yauk

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Three Omics methods applied to the same samples with data transformation by the R-ODAF method—redrawn by copyright transfer from (Li et al. 2021)

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

Examples of deriving PODs using principal component 1 for dose response modelling as described above for β- napthflavone (A and B) and aroclor (C and D). The PCA plots are shown in A and C and the derived POD plots in B and D. The control samples are the orange points and the treatment the blue points in increasing concentration from triangles, squares, crosses, hexagons and stars

Similar articles

  • Progress towards an OECD reporting framework for transcriptomics and metabolomics in regulatory toxicology.

    Harrill JA, Viant MR, Yauk CL, Sachana M, Gant TW, Auerbach SS, Beger RD, Bouhifd M, O'Brien J, Burgoon L, Caiment F, Carpi D, Chen T, Chorley BN, Colbourne J, Corvi R, Debrauwer L, O'Donovan C, Ebbels TMD, Ekman DR, Faulhammer F, Gribaldo L, Hilton GM, Jones SP, Kende A, Lawson TN, Leite SB, Leonards PEG, Luijten M, Martin A, Moussa L, Rudaz S, Schmitz O, Sobanski T, Strauss V, Vaccari M, Vijay V, Weber RJM, Williams AJ, Williams A, Thomas RS, Whelan M. Harrill JA, et al. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2021 Oct;125:105020. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2021.105020. Epub 2021 Jul 29. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2021. PMID: 34333066 Free PMC article.

  • Applying 'omics technologies in chemicals risk assessment: Report of an ECETOC workshop.

    Buesen R, Chorley BN, da Silva Lima B, Daston G, Deferme L, Ebbels T, Gant TW, Goetz A, Greally J, Gribaldo L, Hackermüller J, Hubesch B, Jennen D, Johnson K, Kanno J, Kauffmann HM, Laffont M, McMullen P, Meehan R, Pemberton M, Perdichizzi S, Piersma AH, Sauer UG, Schmidt K, Seitz H, Sumida K, Tollefsen KE, Tong W, Tralau T, van Ravenzwaay B, Weber RJM, Worth A, Yauk C, Poole A. Buesen R, et al. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2017 Dec;91 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S3-S13. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2017.09.002. Epub 2017 Sep 25. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2017. PMID: 28958911 Free PMC article. Review.

  • Towards the development of an omics data analysis framework.

    Verheijen M, Tong W, Shi L, Gant TW, Seligman B, Caiment F. Verheijen M, et al. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2020 Apr;112:104621. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104621. Epub 2020 Feb 19. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2020. PMID: 32087354

  • The Role of Omics in the Application of Adverse Outcome Pathways for Chemical Risk Assessment.

    Brockmeier EK, Hodges G, Hutchinson TH, Butler E, Hecker M, Tollefsen KE, Garcia-Reyero N, Kille P, Becker D, Chipman K, Colbourne J, Collette TW, Cossins A, Cronin M, Graystock P, Gutsell S, Knapen D, Katsiadaki I, Lange A, Marshall S, Owen SF, Perkins EJ, Plaistow S, Schroeder A, Taylor D, Viant M, Ankley G, Falciani F. Brockmeier EK, et al. Toxicol Sci. 2017 Aug 1;158(2):252-262. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfx097. Toxicol Sci. 2017. PMID: 28525648 Free PMC article. Review.

  • Next generation testing strategy for assessment of genomic damage: A conceptual framework and considerations.

    Dearfield KL, Gollapudi BB, Bemis JC, Benz RD, Douglas GR, Elespuru RK, Johnson GE, Kirkland DJ, LeBaron MJ, Li AP, Marchetti F, Pottenger LH, Rorije E, Tanir JY, Thybaud V, van Benthem J, Yauk CL, Zeiger E, Luijten M. Dearfield KL, et al. Environ Mol Mutagen. 2017 Jun;58(5):264-283. doi: 10.1002/em.22045. Epub 2016 Sep 21. Environ Mol Mutagen. 2017. PMID: 27650663 Review.

Cited by

References

    1. Ball N, Bars R, Botham PA, et al. A framework for chemical safety assessment incorporating new approach methodologies within REACH. Arch Toxicol. 2022;96(3):743–766. doi: 10.1007/s00204-021-03215-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bertucci F, Bernard K, Loriod B, et al. Sensitivity issues in DNA array-based expression measurements and performance of nylon microarrays for small samples. Hum Mol Genet. 1999;8(9):1715–1722. doi: 10.1093/hmg/8.9.1715. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buesen R, Chorley BN, da Silva LB, et al. Applying 'omics technologies in chemicals risk assessment: report of an ECETOC workshop. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2017;91(Suppll 1):3–13. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2017.09.002. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Burge CB. Chipping away at the transcriptome. Nat Genet. 2001;27(3):232–234. doi: 10.1038/85772. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cheung V, Morley M, Aguilar F, Massimi A, Kucherlapati R, Childs G. Making and reading microarrays. Nat Genet. 1999;21:15–19. doi: 10.1038/4439. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources