Preliminary Studies on Validation of Calu-3 Cell Line as a Model for Screening Respiratory Mucosa Irritation and Toxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is need to develop reproducible methods and experimental models for screening mucosal irritation and toxicity for drugs and pharmaceutical excipients. The aim of this study was to validate Calu-3 cell line as a model for screening respiratory irritation and toxicity of drugs and excipients. Eighteen test compounds were selected according to their irritation potential and European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) guidelines. Cell toxicity and irritation was determined using MTT assay. Data analysis and interpretation were done using modified ECVAM approach; where replicate values met acceptance criteria if percent relative standard deviation (RSD) of the raw data is <18%. Compounds with mean relative viability values of 50% and below were classified as irritant (I); those above 50% were non-irritant (NI). At low concentration (0.2% w/v) and 1 h incubation, the Calu-3 cell culture model accurately predicted the toxicity of most test compounds. The specificity of our proposed model (percentage of in vivo non-irritants correctly predicted), concordance (percentage of compounds correctly predicted) and sensitivity (percentage of in vivo irritants correctly predicted) at 0.2% w/v and 60 min exposure were 100%, 72%, and 44%, respectively. In conclusion, the Calu-3 cell line in conjunction with MTT assay appears to be a potentially useful tool for screening drugs and excipients for respiratory mucosa irritation and toxicity. However, as the data reported in this study were solely based on MTT assay, additional studies are needed using other toxicity-/irritation-indicating methods to confirm the observed trend.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".