Causal, predictive or observational? Different understandings of key event relationships for adverse outcome pathways and their implications on practice

IF 4.2 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental toxicology and pharmacology Pub Date : 2024-11-30 DOI:10.1016/j.etap.2024.104597
Zheng Zhou , Jeroen L.A. Pennings , Ullrika Sahlin
{"title":"Causal, predictive or observational? Different understandings of key event relationships for adverse outcome pathways and their implications on practice","authors":"Zheng Zhou ,&nbsp;Jeroen L.A. Pennings ,&nbsp;Ullrika Sahlin","doi":"10.1016/j.etap.2024.104597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) framework is pivotal in toxicology, but the, terminology describing Key Event Relationships (KERs) varies within AOP guidelines.This study examined the usage of causal, observational and predictive terms in AOP, documentation and their adaptation in AOP development. A literature search and text, analysis of key AOP guidance documents revealed nuanced usage of these terms, with KERs often described as both causal and predictive. The adaptation of, terminology varies across AOP development stages. Evaluation of KER causality often, relies targeted blocking experiments and weight-of-evidence assessments in the, putative and qualitative stages. Our findings highlight a potential mismatch between,terminology in guidelines and methodologies in practice, particularly in inferring,causality from predictive models. We argue for careful consideration of terms like, causal and essential to facilitate interdisciplinary communication. Furthermore, integrating known causality into quantitative AOP models remains a challenge.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11775,"journal":{"name":"Environmental toxicology and pharmacology","volume":"113 ","pages":"Article 104597"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental toxicology and pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1382668924002370","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) framework is pivotal in toxicology, but the, terminology describing Key Event Relationships (KERs) varies within AOP guidelines.This study examined the usage of causal, observational and predictive terms in AOP, documentation and their adaptation in AOP development. A literature search and text, analysis of key AOP guidance documents revealed nuanced usage of these terms, with KERs often described as both causal and predictive. The adaptation of, terminology varies across AOP development stages. Evaluation of KER causality often, relies targeted blocking experiments and weight-of-evidence assessments in the, putative and qualitative stages. Our findings highlight a potential mismatch between,terminology in guidelines and methodologies in practice, particularly in inferring,causality from predictive models. We argue for careful consideration of terms like, causal and essential to facilitate interdisciplinary communication. Furthermore, integrating known causality into quantitative AOP models remains a challenge.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
因果关系,预测还是观察?对不良结果通路关键事件关系的不同理解及其对实践的影响
不良结果途径(AOPs)框架在毒理学中是关键的,但是描述关键事件关系(KERs)的术语在AOP指南中是不同的。本研究考察了因果、观察和预测术语在AOP中的使用、文档以及它们在AOP开发中的适应性。对关键AOP指导文档的文献搜索和文本分析揭示了这些术语的微妙用法,KERs通常被描述为因果性和预测性。术语的适应在AOP开发阶段是不同的。对KER因果关系的评估通常依赖于在假设和定性阶段进行的有针对性的阻断实验和证据权重评估。我们的发现强调了指南中的术语和实践中的方法之间的潜在不匹配,特别是在从预测模型推断因果关系时。我们主张仔细考虑“因果”和“必要”等术语,以促进跨学科交流。此外,将已知的因果关系集成到定量AOP模型中仍然是一个挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
4.70%
发文量
185
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology publishes the results of studies concerning toxic and pharmacological effects of (human and veterinary) drugs and of environmental contaminants in animals and man. Areas of special interest are: molecular mechanisms of toxicity, biotransformation and toxicokinetics (including toxicokinetic modelling), molecular, biochemical and physiological mechanisms explaining differences in sensitivity between species and individuals, the characterisation of pathophysiological models and mechanisms involved in the development of effects and the identification of biological markers that can be used to study exposure and effects in man and animals. In addition to full length papers, short communications, full-length reviews and mini-reviews, Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology will publish in depth assessments of special problem areas. The latter publications may exceed the length of a full length paper three to fourfold. A basic requirement is that the assessments are made under the auspices of international groups of leading experts in the fields concerned. The information examined may either consist of data that were already published, or of new data that were obtained within the framework of collaborative research programmes. Provision is also made for the acceptance of minireviews on (classes of) compounds, toxicities or mechanisms, debating recent advances in rapidly developing fields that fall within the scope of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Microplastics can alter structural configurations of human non-canonical G-quadruplex DNA The impact of APOE4 on neurological symptoms after exposure to K. brevis neurotoxin Exposure to PCB52 (2,2′,5,5′-tetrachlorobiphenyl) blunts induction of the gene for uncoupling protein 1 (UCP1) in white adipose Compound-dependent fetal toxicity after in utero exposure to chemotherapy in a pregnant mouse model Causal, predictive or observational? Different understandings of key event relationships for adverse outcome pathways and their implications on practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1