A quantitative weight-of-evidence review of preclinical studies examining the potential developmental neurotoxicity of acetaminophen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acetaminophen [paracetamol; N-acetyl-para-aminophenol (APAP)] is an antipyretic/analgesic commonly used in the treatment of fever and mild to moderate pain, headache, myalgia, and dysmenorrhea. Recent literature has questioned the safety of acetaminophen use during pregnancy, with an emphasis on whether exposure to the developing nervous system results in behavioral changes consistent with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and/or other cognitive deficits in the offspring. No previous review has used a fully detailed, quantitative weight-of-evidence (QWoE) approach to critically examine the preclinical acetaminophen data with regards to potential developmental neurotoxicity (DNT). Following regulatory guidance, a QWoE framework using prespecified scoring criteria was developed consistent with previous approaches to characterize potential adverse DNT outcomes with considerations for biological relevance of the response to adverse outcomes (outcome score) and the strength of methods and study design (methods score). Considerations for the methods score included (1) experimental design, (2) details/reliability of measurement(s), (3) data transparency, and (4) translational/methodological relevance. Considerations for the outcome score included response-related (1) statistical significance, (2) dose-response, (3) relevance/reliability/magnitude, (4) plausibility, and (5) translational relevance, including consideration of systemic toxicity/hepatotoxicity and therapeutic and/or non-systemically toxic doses and durations of use. Application of this QWoE framework to the 34 in vivo studies identified that assess the potential DNT of acetaminophen resulted in 188 QWoE entries documented across 11 DNT endpoints: social behavior, stereotypic behavior, behavioral rigidity, attention/impulsivity, hyperactivity, anxiety-like behavior, sensorimotor function, spatial learning/memory, nonspatial learning/memory, neuroanatomy, and neurotransmission. For each endpoint, the mean outcome score and methods score were calculated for total entries and for entries segregated by sex to assist in determining data quality and potential adversity. Informed by all 188 entries, the QWoE analysis demonstrated data of moderate quality showing no consistent evidence of DNT in male and female rodents following exposure to acetaminophen at therapeutic and/or nonsystemically toxic doses. Although some of the DNT endpoints (behavioral rigidity, attention/impulsivity, spatial learning/memory, neuroanatomy, and neurotransmission) generally displayed a more limited dataset and/or relatively lower data quality, similar conclusions were drawn based on results indicating a lack of biological relevance and reliability of reported adverse effects. Overall, this QWoE analysis on the preclinical in vivo data demonstrates no consistent evidence of adverse effects following developmental exposure to acetaminophen at therapeutic and/or non-systemically toxic doses on the structure and function of the nervous system, including neuroanatomical, neurotransmission, and behavioral endpoints.
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 | 0.022 | 0.081 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".