PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Robert D Combes

Publications and source records attributed to Robert D Combes.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Quantitative structure activity relationship for the computational prediction of nitrocompounds carcinogenicity.

Several nitrocompounds have been screened for carcinogenicity in rodents, but this is a lengthy and expensive process, taking two years and typically costing 2.5 million dollars, and uses large numbers of animals. There is, therefore, much impetus to develop suitable alternative methods. One possible way of predicting carcinogenicity is to use quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs). QSARs have been widely utilized for toxicity testing, thereby contributing to a reduction in the need for experimental animals. This paper describes the results of applying a TOPological substructural molecular design (TOPS-MODE) approach for predicting the rodent carcinogenicity of nitrocompounds. The model described 79.10% of the experimental variance, with a standard deviation of 0.424. The predictive power of the model was validated by leave-one-out validation, with a determination coefficient of 0.666. In addition, this approach enabled the contribution of different fragments to carcinogenic potency to be assessed, thereby making the relationships between structure and carcinogenicity to be transparent. It was found that the carcinogenic activity of the chemicals analysed was increased by the presence of a primary amine group bonded to the aromatic ring, a manner that was proportional to the ring aromaticity. The nitro group bonded to an aromatic carbon atom is a more important determinant of carcinogenicity than the nitro group bonded to an aliphatic carbon. Finally, the TOPS-MODE approach was compared with four other predictive models, but none of these could explain more than 66% of the variance in the carcinogenic potency with the same number of variables.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

Assessing risk to humans from chemical exposure by using non-animal test data.

The use of data from non-animal toxicity methods in risk assessment has mainly been limited to hazard identification and for elucidating mechanisms of toxicity. However, there is a need to extend the use of in vitro tests to hazard characterisation and risk assessment. This might be feasible by: (a) increased use of human cells of different types; (b) better maintenance of differentiated cells in culture for long periods; (c) use of genetically-engineered cells with useful characteristics; (d) development of complex organotypic cell systems; (e) development of co-cultures of different cell types; and (f) development of techniques for long term culturing, repeat dosing and assessment of recovery. Also, it will be necessary to obtain more information on the differences between cells in culture and in situ in tissues, and on the effects of dosing in vitro and in vivo, to develop realistic and meaningful uncertainty factors to allow in vitro information to be used for risk assessment in its own right, and in conjunction with animal data. These issues and a suggested proposal for using in vitro data in risk assessment are discussed.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗
PubMed2005

The use of non-human primates in biological and medical research: evidence submitted by FRAME to the Academy of Medical Sciences/Medical Research Council/Royal Society/Wellcome Trust Working Group.

The Academy of Medical Sciences, the Medical Research Council, the Royal Society and the Wellcome Trust are undertaking a study into the use of non-human primates in biological and medical research. An independent working group of scientific experts, led by Sir David Weatherall, aims to produce a report summarising the findings of this study, early in 2006. The trends in primate research, and the nature and effects of recent and proposed changes in the global use of non-human primates in research, will be investigated. The associated ethical, welfare and regulatory issues, and the role and impact of the Three Rs principles of refinement, reduction and replacement will also be reviewed. As part of this study, a call for evidence was made. The evidence submitted by FRAME emphasised that the use of non-human primates for fundamental research or for regulatory testing still fails to take into account the fact that, although non-human primates are anatomically and physiologically similar to humans, they are not necessarily relevant models for studies on human disease or human physiology. FRAME continues to believe that we have a duty to ensure that these animals are not used without overwhelming evidence that they are the only suitable and relevant models for use in work of undeniable significance.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗
PubMed2004

Peer review of validation studies: an assessment of the role of the OECD by reference to the validation of the uterotrophic assay for endocrine disruptors.

The involvement of the OECD in managing the validation of the rat uterotrophic assay for endocrine disruptors, and in organising the peer review of the results of this study, has been assessed and compared with the many conclusions and recommendations in several published reports of international workshops on validation, and information in guidance documents, produced by the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), the US Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) and the OECD itself. It is concluded that the OECD has not followed the recommendations for full transparency and independence of the peer-review process. This is based on the fact that it has published a draft guidance document that differs from the report of a recent OECD workshop on validation, in such a way as to give the OECD the flexibility to fully control the peer-review process and, in so doing, to avoid full transparency. Comparison of the timing of the organisation of workshops by the OECD and the progression of the validation study, together with the fact that a draft test guideline for the assay was written before completion of the peer review, suggest that the OECD has given a higher priority to the expedition of the validation and regulatory acceptance of the uterotrophic assay than it has to good scientific and logistical practice. This severely undermines its credibility in the validation process, so, in order for the OECD to be rightly perceived as an honest broker, it is recommended that the OECD should play no role in the validation of new or revised tests, until after they have been successfully validated, peer reviewed, and endorsed by the appropriate authorities, and are ready for test guideline development. With regard to the on-going OECD validation studies of other in vivo assays for endocrine disruptors, the OECD should take immediate steps to ensure full independence and transparency of their peer review.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗
PubMed2004

The case for taking account of metabolism when testing for potential endocrine disruptors in vitro.

Legislation in the USA, Europe and Japan will require that chemicals are tested for their ability to disrupt the hormonal systems of mammals. Such chemicals are known as endocrine disruptors (EDs), and will require extensive testing as part of the new European Union Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) system for the risk assessment of chemicals. Both in vivo and in vitro tests are proposed for this purpose, and there has been much discussion and action concerning the development and validation of such tests. However, to date, little interest has been shown in incorporating metabolism into in vitro tests for EDs, in sharp contrast to other areas of toxicity testing, such as genotoxicity, and, ironically, such in vitro tests are criticised for not modelling in vivo metabolism. This is despite the existence of much information showing that endogenous and exogenous steroids are extensively metabolised by Phase I and Phase II enzymes both in the liver and in hormonally active tissues. Such metabolism can lead to the activation or detoxification of steroids and EDs. The absence of metabolism from these tests could give rise to false-positive data (due to lack of detoxification) or false-negative data (lack of activation). This paper aims to explain why in vitro assays for EDs should incorporate mammalian metabolising systems. The background to ED testing, the test methods available, and the role of mammalian metabolism in the activation and detoxification of both endogenous and exogenous steroids, are described. The available types of metabolising systems are compared, and the potential problems in incorporating metabolising systems into in vitro tests for EDs, and how these might be overcome, are discussed. It is recommended that there should be: a) an assessment of the intrinsic metabolising capacity of cell systems used in tests for EDs; b) an investigation into the relevance of using the prostaglandin H synthase system for metabolising EDs; and c) a feasibility study into the generation of genetically engineered mammalian cell lines expressing specific metabolising enzymes, which could also be used to detect EDs.

Animals↗
PubMed2004

A scientific and animal welfare assessment of the OECD Health Effects Test Guidelines for the safety testing of chemicals under the European Union REACH system.

We have assessed each of the OECD Health Effects Test Guidelines (TGs) that were included in an annex to the Internet consultation issued by the European Commission relating to the Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) legislation for the testing of new and existing chemical substances. Each guideline has been analysed with respect to its design and its scientific and animal welfare implications, the extent to which it makes use of modern techniques, and its suitability to be used in the REACH system for the testing of large numbers of chemicals. The scientific basis of the test and its justification are considered, as well as the numbers of animals required, and the potential adverse effects on them. The prospects and possibilities for applying the Three Rs (reduction, refinement and replacement) to each of the TGs are also discussed. We have proposed an overall testing strategy for how these TGs and other methods could best be deployed for chemicals testing, should it be necessary to fill data gaps. Certain TGs have been omitted from the strategy, when we have considered them to be unnecessary for chemicals testing. A series of recommendations has been made for improving the TGs with regard to both their scientific content and ways in which they could be better designed in relation to optimising the use of the animals concerned, and minimising adverse welfare consequences to them. Our investigations show that there is an urgent need to update the TGs to reflect modern techniques and methods, and to use current approaches for applying refinement strategies to improve the scientific and animal welfare aspects of the procedures used. Improvements can and should be made in all aspects of toxicity testing, from sample preparation, and animal housing, care and feeding, to dose formulation, test material administration, and the histopathological and clinical analysis of tissue samples. Opportunities for streamlining individual assays are very limited, but testing could be made more efficient by: a) only undertaking studies that provide relevant data; b) making greater use of screens and preliminary testing; c) applying some tests simultaneously to the same animals; d) using one sex; and e) eliminating redundant tests. In conclusion, it is clear that, as they stand, the OECD Health Effects TGs are unsuitable for use in the European Union REACH system, for which potentially very large numbers of laboratory animals will be needed for the testing of a very large number of chemicals.

Animal Welfare↗
PubMed2003

A critical assessment of the OECD collaborative study to validate the uterotrophic assay for the detection of oestrogenic and anti-oestrogenic chemicals.

The design and execution of a recently completed validation study on the rat uterotrophic assay for detecting oestrogens and anti-oestrogens, managed by the OECD, are critically assessed with respect to internationally agreed criteria for the validation of new in vitro and in vivo toxicity test methods. It is concluded that, while the design of the study did not take account of several important criteria for validation, the uterotrophic assay appears to reliably detect the strong and weak oestrogenic substances used in the study, which act via binding to the oestrogen receptor in vivo. However, the reliability of the assay has not been substantiated for detecting anti-oestrogens that act as antagonists, due to the involvement of an insufficient number of experiments and test chemicals. Moreover, the data do not permit an assessment of the accuracy of the prediction of oestrogenicity, and the protocols have not been sufficiently optimised with regard to controlling variables. This problem has been exacerbated by a wish to introduce as much flexibility as possible into the protocols during the formal validation phase of the study, rather than during a separate prevalidation stage. In addition, the choice between surgically treated and/or immature animals, and details of housing and husbandry conditions that are necessary for increasing the sensitivity and efficiency of the assay, need to be clarified. The assay also lacks a well-defined prediction model by which the overall relevance of the data to toxicity, and especially to human hazard, can be assessed, and no performance criteria have been established. The results of this analysis of the study indicate that it would be premature to produce an OECD test guideline for the uterotrophic assay at this time, before some of the above issues have been satisfactorily resolved.

Animals↗
PubMed2003

A survey of stakeholder organisations on the proposed new European chemicals policy.

In February 2001, the European Commission published a White Paper proposing that a single new system of chemical regulation should be applied throughout the Member States of the European Union. The proposed Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) system was to include both new and existing chemicals, with the aim of ensuring that sufficient pertinent data were made available to enable human health and the environment to be protected. The policy was founded on the principle of sustainable industrial development, and ambitiously attempted to incorporate the needs and views of key stakeholder organisations, such as industry, trade associations, consumer groups, environmentalists, animal welfarists and Member State governments. During the period between the publication of the White Paper and the on-line publication of consultation documents, as part of a public consultation exercise, in May 2003, many of these key stakeholder organisations produced material in support of or critical of the White Paper, either in part or as a whole. In this paper, we have attempted to review this extensive material and to present it in the context of the current chemical regulatory system that the REACH system will replace. Emphasis is placed on the impact of the new policy on the number of animals used in the testing regimes within the REACH system and the inclusion of alternative methods into the legislation. Although supportive of the overriding aims of the new policy, FRAME believes that the fundamental concept of a risk-free environment is flawed, and that the new REACH system will involve the unjustifiable use of millions of laboratory animals. The new policy does include alternative methods, particularly for base-set substances. Nevertheless, alternative testing methods that are already available have been excluded and replaced with outdated in vivo versions. There is also insufficient detail with regard to the further development and validation of alternative methods, particularly for substances of high concern, such as endocrine disrupters or reproductive toxins, for which no alternative testing methods currently exist.

Animal Experimentation↗
PubMed2003

FRAME and the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution: common recommendations for assessing risks posed by chemicals under the EU REACH system.

This document discusses recommendations made by FRAME and the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) with regard to the current European Commission proposals on the Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) system for assessing the risks of chemicals to humans, wildlife and the environment. Of several common aims and recommendations, the two most important are: a) the greater use of non-animal testing methods, especially computational prediction methods (for example, [quantitative] structure-activity relationships, expert systems and biokinetic modelling) for prioritising chemicals for hazard assessment; and b) the greater use of intelligent exposure-based targeted risk assessment, with less emphasis being placed on tonnage-triggers. FRAME has produced a decision-tree testing scheme to illustrate the way in which these approaches could be used, together with in vitro test methods. This scheme has been slightly modified to take account of proposals subsequently made by the RCEP. In addition, FRAME points out that new and improved computational methods are needed through more coordinated research, and that these and existing methods need to be validated. The similarities between the independent publications of FRAME and the RCEP add weight to the recommendations that each have made concerning the implementation of the REACH system.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗
PubMed2003

The mouse bioassay for diarrhetic shellfish poisoning: a gross misuse of laboratory animals and of scientific methodology.

The UK shellfish industry has recently been affected by the statutory closure of several cockle beds, following the detection of samples causing rapid and severe reactions in the regulatory approved test for diarrhetic shellfish poisoning (DSP) toxins, the mouse bioassay (MBA). It is contended that these so-called atypical results are due to procedural artefacts of the MBA; so far, several studies have failed to identify their cause. This paper critically assesses the development, regulatory use and methodological deficiencies of the MBA. It also discusses how testing for DSP toxins could and should have been improved and made more humane by applying the Three Rs concept of Reduction, Refinement and Replacement, and by the proper validation of the test method used. It is concluded that the MBA should not have been developed for the routine screening of shellfish samples, as it has a substantially severe endpoint and is not used as part of a tiered-testing strategy with non-animal methods. Moreover, during the UK monitoring programme for DSP toxins, the assay has been used without an optimised and universal protocol, and apparently without due regard to the principles of basic scientific methodology. In view of this, the atypical results obtained for cockle samples cannot be relied on as evidence of a human health hazard. It is recommended that the use of the MBA should be discontinued as soon as possible, in favour of other methods, especially those involving non-animal techniques. In the short-term, these methods should be based on analytical chemical detection systems and the essential availability of the relevant pure toxin standards. The lack of any known toxins in samples should be taken as evidence of lack of contamination. The suitability of the existing non-animal methods needs to be assessed as a matter of urgency. It is crucial that all new methods should be properly validated, and that their acceptability for their stated purposes should be endorsed by recognised criteria and validation centres, before being recommended to, or required by, regulatory agencies. In this way, the possibility that scientifically unsuitable methods will once again be used for monitoring for the contamination of shellfish with toxins can be avoided. This gross misuse of laboratory animals and ill-judged application of science should never be allowed to occur again.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗
PubMed2002

The ECVAM workshops: a critical assessment of their impact on the development, validation and acceptance of alternative methods.

ECVAM initiated its workshop programme in 1994, to enable it to become well informed about the state of the art of non-animal test development and validation, and about the possible incorporation of alternatives into regulatory requirements for safety testing. Fifty-one such workshops have been held on specific topics, up to 2002. In these workshops, the current status of in vitro tests and their potential uses were reviewed and recommendations were made as to the best ways forward to progress and enhance the utilisation of in vitro methods. Reports for 46 of these workshops have been published in ATLA. Most of the workshops focused on in vitro replacement methods, although an increasing number have dealt with reduction and refinement. The recommendations in the ECVAM workshops have been progressed further by: a) the formation of ECVAM task forces; b) the organisation of further workshops; c) the activities of scientific committees; d) the provision of earmarked research funding; and e) the conduct of validation studies. Examples of each of these activities are discussed. Some individual workshops are covered in more detail and several recommendations that have so far not been acted on are also considered. The workshops and their reports have had a substantial effect on the development and implementation of alternative methods, and have been a major factor in contributing to the success of the first nine years of ECVAM's existence. It is strongly recommended that ECVAM continues to organise workshops and to publish their findings, and several suggestions are made for topics of future workshops.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The implications of microarray technology for animal use in scientific research.

Microarray technology has the potential to affect the number of laboratory animals used, the severity of animal experiments, and the development of non-animal alternatives in several areas scientific research. Microarrays can contain hundreds or thousands of microscopic spots of DNA, immobilised on a solid support, and their use enables global patterns of gene expression to be determined in a single experiment. This technology is being used to improve our understanding of the operation of biological systems during health and disease, and their responses to chemical insults. Although it is impossible to predict with certainty any future trends regarding animal use, microarray technology might not initially reduce animal use, as is often claimed to be the case. The accelerated pace of research as a result of the use of microarrays could increase overall animal use in basic and applied biological research, by increasing the numbers of interesting genes identified for further analysis, and the number of potential targets for drug development. Each new lead will require further evaluation i n studies that could involve animals. In toxicity testing, microarray studies could lead to increases in animal studies, if further confirmatory and other studies are performed. However, before such technology can be used more extensively, several technical problems need to be overcome, and the relevance of the data to biological processes needs to be assessed. Were microarray technology to be used in the manner envisaged by its protagonists, there need to be efforts to increase the likelihood that its application will create new opportunities for reducing, refining and replacing animal use. This comment is a critical assessment of the possible implications of the application of microarray technology on animal experimentation in various research areas, and makes some recommendations for maximising the application of the Three Rs.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗