人类和大鼠呼吸道解剖和生理的差异及其对毒理学评估的影响。

IF 3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, LEGAL Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology Pub Date : 2024-05-20 DOI:10.1016/j.yrtph.2024.105648
Andreas O. Stucki , Ursula G. Sauer , David G. Allen , Nicole C. Kleinstreuer , Monique M. Perron , Krystle L. Yozzo , Anna B. Lowit , Amy J. Clippinger
{"title":"人类和大鼠呼吸道解剖和生理的差异及其对毒理学评估的影响。","authors":"Andreas O. Stucki ,&nbsp;Ursula G. Sauer ,&nbsp;David G. Allen ,&nbsp;Nicole C. Kleinstreuer ,&nbsp;Monique M. Perron ,&nbsp;Krystle L. Yozzo ,&nbsp;Anna B. Lowit ,&nbsp;Amy J. Clippinger","doi":"10.1016/j.yrtph.2024.105648","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Inhalation is a critical route through which substances can exert adverse effects in humans; therefore, it is important to characterize the potential effects that inhaled substances may have on the human respiratory tract by using fit for purpose, reliable, and human relevant testing tools. In regulatory toxicology testing, rats have primarily been used to assess the effects of inhaled substances as they—being mammals—share similarities in structure and function of the respiratory tract with humans. However, questions about inter-species differences impacting the predictability of human effects have surfaced. Disparities in macroscopic anatomy, microscopic anatomy, or physiology, such as breathing mode (<em>e.g.</em>, nose-only versus oronasal breathing), airway structure (<em>e.g.</em>, complexity of the nasal turbinates), cell types and location within the respiratory tract, and local metabolism may impact inhalation toxicity testing results. This review shows that these key differences describe uncertainty in the use of rat data to predict human effects and supports an opportunity to harness modern toxicology tools and a detailed understanding of the human respiratory tract to develop testing approaches grounded in human biology. Ultimately, as the regulatory purpose is protecting human health, there is a need for testing approaches based on human biology and mechanisms of toxicity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20852,"journal":{"name":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","volume":"150 ","pages":"Article 105648"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230024000898/pdfft?md5=7be3c9fb7e5bc88bed83dc22a805d5d4&pid=1-s2.0-S0273230024000898-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in the anatomy and physiology of the human and rat respiratory tracts and impact on toxicological assessments\",\"authors\":\"Andreas O. Stucki ,&nbsp;Ursula G. Sauer ,&nbsp;David G. Allen ,&nbsp;Nicole C. Kleinstreuer ,&nbsp;Monique M. Perron ,&nbsp;Krystle L. Yozzo ,&nbsp;Anna B. Lowit ,&nbsp;Amy J. Clippinger\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.yrtph.2024.105648\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Inhalation is a critical route through which substances can exert adverse effects in humans; therefore, it is important to characterize the potential effects that inhaled substances may have on the human respiratory tract by using fit for purpose, reliable, and human relevant testing tools. In regulatory toxicology testing, rats have primarily been used to assess the effects of inhaled substances as they—being mammals—share similarities in structure and function of the respiratory tract with humans. However, questions about inter-species differences impacting the predictability of human effects have surfaced. Disparities in macroscopic anatomy, microscopic anatomy, or physiology, such as breathing mode (<em>e.g.</em>, nose-only versus oronasal breathing), airway structure (<em>e.g.</em>, complexity of the nasal turbinates), cell types and location within the respiratory tract, and local metabolism may impact inhalation toxicity testing results. This review shows that these key differences describe uncertainty in the use of rat data to predict human effects and supports an opportunity to harness modern toxicology tools and a detailed understanding of the human respiratory tract to develop testing approaches grounded in human biology. Ultimately, as the regulatory purpose is protecting human health, there is a need for testing approaches based on human biology and mechanisms of toxicity.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"150 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105648\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230024000898/pdfft?md5=7be3c9fb7e5bc88bed83dc22a805d5d4&pid=1-s2.0-S0273230024000898-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230024000898\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230024000898","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

吸入是物质对人体产生不良影响的一个关键途径;因此,必须使用符合目的、可靠且与人体相关的测试工具来确定吸入物质可能对人体呼吸道产生的潜在影响。在监管毒理学测试中,大鼠主要用于评估吸入物质的影响,因为作为哺乳动物,大鼠的呼吸道结构和功能与人类相似。然而,关于种间差异影响人类效应可预测性的问题已经浮出水面。宏观解剖学、微观解剖学或生理学方面的差异,如呼吸模式(如纯鼻呼吸与口鼻呼吸)、气道结构(如鼻甲的复杂性)、呼吸道内的细胞类型和位置以及局部新陈代谢,都可能影响吸入毒性测试结果。本综述表明,这些关键差异说明了使用大鼠数据预测人体影响的不确定性,并为利用现代毒理学工具和对人体呼吸道的详细了解来开发基于人体生物学的测试方法提供了机会。归根结底,由于监管的目的是保护人类健康,因此需要基于人类生物学和毒性机制的测试方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Differences in the anatomy and physiology of the human and rat respiratory tracts and impact on toxicological assessments

Inhalation is a critical route through which substances can exert adverse effects in humans; therefore, it is important to characterize the potential effects that inhaled substances may have on the human respiratory tract by using fit for purpose, reliable, and human relevant testing tools. In regulatory toxicology testing, rats have primarily been used to assess the effects of inhaled substances as they—being mammals—share similarities in structure and function of the respiratory tract with humans. However, questions about inter-species differences impacting the predictability of human effects have surfaced. Disparities in macroscopic anatomy, microscopic anatomy, or physiology, such as breathing mode (e.g., nose-only versus oronasal breathing), airway structure (e.g., complexity of the nasal turbinates), cell types and location within the respiratory tract, and local metabolism may impact inhalation toxicity testing results. This review shows that these key differences describe uncertainty in the use of rat data to predict human effects and supports an opportunity to harness modern toxicology tools and a detailed understanding of the human respiratory tract to develop testing approaches grounded in human biology. Ultimately, as the regulatory purpose is protecting human health, there is a need for testing approaches based on human biology and mechanisms of toxicity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
8.80%
发文量
147
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology publishes peer reviewed articles that involve the generation, evaluation, and interpretation of experimental animal and human data that are of direct importance and relevance for regulatory authorities with respect to toxicological and pharmacological regulations in society. All peer-reviewed articles that are published should be devoted to improve the protection of human health and environment. Reviews and discussions are welcomed that address legal and/or regulatory decisions with respect to risk assessment and management of toxicological and pharmacological compounds on a scientific basis. It addresses an international readership of scientists, risk assessors and managers, and other professionals active in the field of human and environmental health. Types of peer-reviewed articles published: -Original research articles of relevance for regulatory aspects covering aspects including, but not limited to: 1.Factors influencing human sensitivity 2.Exposure science related to risk assessment 3.Alternative toxicological test methods 4.Frameworks for evaluation and integration of data in regulatory evaluations 5.Harmonization across regulatory agencies 6.Read-across methods and evaluations -Contemporary Reviews on policy related Research issues -Letters to the Editor -Guest Editorials (by Invitation)
期刊最新文献
Comparison of carbonyls and tobacco-specific nitrosamines in aerosols of heated tobacco products and conventional cigarette smoke using both targeted and untargeted analytical methods Accurate regulatory classification of chemical respiratory allergens: The case for robust characterisation of causation Applicability of the in vitro skin irritation methods (EpiSkin™, EpiDerm™ SIT) to organosilicon-based substances Editorial Board Toxicological evaluation of vanadium and derivation of a parenteral tolerable intake value for medical devices
×
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