Integration of new approach methods for the assessment of data-poor chemicals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of new approach methods (NAMs), including high-throughput, in vitro bioactivity data, in setting a point-of-departure (POD) will accelerate the pace of human health hazard assessments. Combining hazard and exposure predictions into a bioactivity:exposure ratio (BER) for use in risk-based prioritization and utilizing NAM-based bioactivity flags to indicate potential hazards of interest for further prediction or mechanism-based screening together comprise a prospective approach for management of substances with limited traditional toxicity testing data. In this work, we demonstrate a NAM-based assessment case study conducted via the Accelerating the Pace of Chemical Risk Assessment initiative, a consortium of international research and regulatory scientists. The primary objective was to develop a reusable and adaptable approach for addressing chemicals with limited traditional toxicity data using a NAM-based POD, BER, and bioactivity-based flags for indication of putative endocrine, developmental, neurological, and immunosuppressive effects via data generation and interpretation for 200 substances. Multiple data streams, including in silico and in vitro NAMs, were used. High-throughput transcriptomics and phenotypic profiling data, as well as targeted biochemical and cell-based assays, were combined with generic high-throughput toxicokinetic models parameterized with chemical-specific data to estimate dose for comparison to exposure predictions. This case study further enables regulatory scientists from different international purviews to utilize efficient approaches for prospective chemical management, addressing hazard and risk-based data needs, while reducing the need for animal studies. This work demonstrates the feasibility of using a battery of toxicodynamic and toxicokinetic NAMs to provide a NAM-based POD for screening-level assessment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".