Assessment of the Embryonic Stem Cell Test and application and use in the pharmaceutical industry
BACKGROUND: The European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) designed the Embryonic Stem Cell Test (EST) as a tool for classifying developmentally toxic compounds. An in vitro tool to assess developmental toxicity would be of great value to the pharmaceutical industry to help wi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Birth defects research. Part B. Developmental and reproductive toxicology 2008-04, Vol.83 (2), p.104-111 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | BACKGROUND: The European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) designed the Embryonic Stem Cell Test (EST) as a tool for classifying developmentally toxic compounds. An in vitro tool to assess developmental toxicity would be of great value to the pharmaceutical industry to help with toxicity‐associated attrition. METHODS: ECVAM's EST protocol was used, but employing a different mouse embryonic stem cell (ESC) line and an alternative differentiation medium. A subset of the compounds used to validate the EST assay along with a number of in‐house pharmaceutical compounds plus marketed pharmaceutical compounds were used to assess the EST performance with receptor‐mediated compounds. RESULTS: Our results with ECVAM compounds mirrored ECVAM's. Compounds that were developmentally toxic in vivo were classified by the EST as moderate risk. Overall, the accuracy was 75% with the current set of data and the predictivity of low‐, moderate‐, and high‐risk compounds was 90, 71, and 60% while the precision was 59, 86, and 100%, respectively. Interestingly, a number of the non‐developmentally toxic compounds had values for the 3T3 IC50 values, which were lower than the ESC IC50 and ID50, a situation not taken into account by ECVAM when designing the EST algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The assay as currently constructed has a significant false‐positive rate (∼40%), but a very low false‐negative rate (∼7%). Additional moderate‐ and high‐risk compounds need to be assessed to increase confidence, accuracy, and understanding in the EST's predictivity. Birth Defects Res (Part B), 2008. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1542-9733 1542-9741 |
DOI: | 10.1002/bdrb.20148 |