Sens-it-iv is an FP6 Integrated Project that finished in March 2011 after 66 months of activity, thanks to 12 million € of funding. The ultimate goal of the Sens-it-iv project was the development of a set of in vitro methods for the assessment of the skin and respiratory sensitization potential of chemicals and proteins. The level of development was intended to be at the point to enter the pre-validation phase. At the end of the project it can be concluded that the goal has been largely accomplished. Several advanced methods were evaluated extensively, and for some of them a detailed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) was established. Other, less advanced methods also contributed to our understanding of the mechanisms driving sensitization. The present contribution, which has been prepared with the support of CAAT-Europe, represents a short summary of what was discussed during the 3-day end congress of the Sens-it-iv project in Brussels. It presents a list of methods that are ready for skin sensitization hazard assessment. Potency evaluation and the possibility of distinguishing skin from respiratory sensitizers are also well advanced.

Modern toxicology has embraced in vitro methods, and major hopes are based on the omics technologies and systems biology approaches they bring along (Hartung and McBride, 2011; Hartung et al., 2012). A culture of stringent validation has been developed for such approaches (Leist et al., 2010, 2012a,b), while the quality and usefulness of animal experiments have been little scrutinized. A new study (Seok et al., 2013) now shows the low predictivity of animal responses in the field of inflammation. These findings corroborate earlier findings from comparisons in the fields of neurodegeneration, stroke and sepsis. The low predictivity of animal experiments in research areas allowing direct comparisons of mouse versus human data puts strong doubt on the usefulness of animal data as key technology to predict human safety.

Metabolomics, the comprehensive analysis of metabolites in a biological system, provides detailed information about the biochemical/physiological status of a biological system, and about the changes caused by chemicals. Metabolomics analysis is used in many fields, ranging from the analysis of the physiological status of genetically modified organisms in safety science to the evaluation of human health conditions. In toxicology, metabolomics is the -omics discipline that is most closely related to classical knowledge of disturbed biochemical pathways. It allows rapid identification of the potential targets of a hazardous compound. It can give information on target organs and often can help to improve our understanding regarding the mode-of-action of a given compound. Such insights aid the discovery of biomarkers that either indicate pathophysiological conditions or help the monitoring of the efficacy of drug therapies. The first toxicological applications of metabolomics were for mechanistic research, but different ways to use the technology in a regulatory context are being explored. Ideally, further progress in that direction will position the metabolomics approach to address the challenges of toxicology of the 21st century. To address these issues, scientists from academia, industry, and regulatory bodies came together in a workshop to discuss the current status of applied metabolomics and its potential in the safety assessment of compounds. We report here on the conclusions of three working groups addressing questions regarding 1) metabolomics for in vitro studies 2) the appropriate use of metabolomics in systems toxicology, and 3) use of metabolomics in a regulatory context.

Threats of pyrogenicity were discovered more than a century ago. Measures to determine the safety of parenterals and, more recently, medical devices and cell therapies for human use have been in place for 70 years. Currently, there are three testing possibilities available: the Rabbit Pyrogen Test, the Limulus Amebocyte Lysate test (Bacterial Endotoxin Test), and test systems using human whole blood or human monocytes, called Monocyte Activation Test (MAT). The MAT is based on the human fever reaction and thus most closely reflects the human situation. Unfortunately, regulations and testing guidelines are not fully harmonized, despite formal international validation. Furthermore, data showing that the MAT is capable of covering the totality of possible pyrogens relevant to humans were not included in the MAT validations of the last decade. For this review we collate evidence from published literature, unpublished data of our own, and results from the international validation study to show that there is overwhelming scientific evidence to conclude that the whole blood MAT reliably detects non-endotoxin pyrogens. Therefore, further validation exercises do not seem warranted.

Human intestinal Caco-2 cells were differentiated using serum-reduced medium with fetal bovine serum (FBS) added only to the basolateral (BL) medium, and four serum-free media, containing insulin, transferrin, selenium (ITS), or MITO+™ serum extender (ITS plus growth factors), with or without addition of a lipid mixture, respectively. Differentiation was assessed by monitoring monolayer permeability, alkaline phosphatase and sucrase activities, and the transport of digoxin and cephalexin. Notably, the serum-reduced protocol produced results that were comparable to cells differentiated in the control medium and should be recommended as an alternative to the use of 10% FBS in both apical (AP) and BL media. ITS serum-free medium elicited permeability values and cephalexin transport similar to control cells. MITO+™ medium was the most efficient in promoting the two transport activities investigated, and it should be further evaluated with a larger set of substances, although its undisclosed composition represents a limit that may override these advantages.

To further develop an integrated in vitro testing strategy for replacement of in vivo tests for (anti-)estrogenicity testing, the ligand-modulated interaction of coregulators with estrogen receptor α was assessed using a PamChip® plate. The relative estrogenic potencies determined, based on ERα binding to coregulator peptides in the presence of ligands on the PamChip® plate, were compared to the relative estrogenic potencies as determined in the in vivo uterotrophic assay. The results show that the estrogenic potencies predicted by the 57 coactivators on the peptide microarray for 18 compounds that display a clear E2 dose-dependent response (goodness of fit of a logistic dose-response model of 0.90 or higher) correlated very well with their in vivo potencies in the uterotrophic assay, i.e., coefficient of determination values for 30 coactivators higher than or equal to 0.85. Moreover, this coregulator binding assay is able to distinguish ER agonists from ER antagonists: profiles of selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen, were distinct from those of pure ER agonists, such as dienestrol. Combination of this coregulator binding assay with other types of in vitro assays, e.g., reporter gene assays and the H295R steroidogenesis assay, will frame an in vitro test panel for screening and prioritization of chemicals, thereby contributing to the reduction and ultimately the replacement of animal testing for (anti-)estrogenic effects.

It is important to stimulate innovation for regulatory testing methods. Scrutinizing the knowledge of (un)certainty of data from actual standard in vivo methods could foster the interest in new testing approaches. Since standard in vivo data often are used as reference data for model development, improved uncertainty accountability also would support the validation of new in vitro and in silico methods, as well as the definition of acceptance criteria for the new methods. Hazard and risk estimates, transparent for their uncertainty, could further support the 3Rs, since they may help focus additional information requirements on aspects of highest uncertainty. Here we provide an overview on the various types of uncertainties in quantitative and qualitative terms and suggest improving this knowledge base. We also reference principle concepts on how to use uncertainty information for improved hazard characterization and development of new testing methods.

Validation of new approaches in regulatory toxicology is commonly defined as the independent assessment of the reproducibility and relevance (the scientific basis and predictive capacity) of a test for a particular purpose. In large ring trials, the emphasis to date has been mainly on reproducibility and predictive capacity (comparison to the traditional test) with less attention given to the scientific or mechanistic basis. Assessing predictive capacity is difficult for novel approaches (which are based on mechanism), such as pathways of toxicity or the complex networks within the organism (systems toxicology). This is highly relevant for implementing Toxicology for the 21st Century, either by high-throughput testing in the ToxCast/Tox21 project or omics-based testing in the Human Toxome Project. This article explores the mostly neglected assessment of a test's scientific basis, which moves mechanism and causality to the foreground when validating/qualifying tests. Such mechanistic validation faces the problem of establishing causality in complex systems. However, pragmatic adaptations of the Bradford Hill criteria, as well as bioinformatic tools, are emerging. As critical infrastructures of the organism are perturbed by a toxic mechanism we argue that by focusing on the target of toxicity and its vulnerability, in addition to the way it is perturbed, we can anchor the identification of the mechanism and its verification.