Toxicologic Pathology Forum: Opinion on Designation of Adverse and Nonadverse Histopathological Findings in Toxicity Studies: The Pathologist’s Dilemma

In this opinion piece, we discuss some proposed principles for designating adversity and nonadversity of histopathological changes. The suggested approach categorizes the classes of findings noted in toxicity studies with illustrations and examples and suggests adversity or nonadversity for each cla...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Toxicologic pathology 2019-07, Vol.47 (5), p.564-573
Hauptverfasser: Gopinath, Chirukandath, Mowat, Vasanthi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 573
container_issue 5
container_start_page 564
container_title Toxicologic pathology
container_volume 47
creator Gopinath, Chirukandath
Mowat, Vasanthi
description In this opinion piece, we discuss some proposed principles for designating adversity and nonadversity of histopathological changes. The suggested approach categorizes the classes of findings noted in toxicity studies with illustrations and examples and suggests adversity or nonadversity for each class, in the authors’ opinions, with rationales. Although the suggestions and examples offered in this opinion piece are generally in agreement with Society of Toxicologic Pathology best practices guideline on adversity, the authors suggest and highlight occasional divergences and differences of opinion. This is because making an adversity call is a complex and challenging topic that is difficult to simplify. Some of the challenges in deciding on adversity are discussed, especially those related to making an adversity call on a histopathological finding in isolation, based on the nature and extent of severity. The authors demonstrate some of these situations with examples. Finally, the authors suggest, in contrast to the guidelines, occasional use of a separate category for findings that are less easily classified. *This is an opinion article submitted to the Toxicologic Pathology Forum. It represents the views of the author(s). It does not constitute an official position of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology, British Society of Toxicological Pathology, or European Society of Toxicologic Pathology, and the views expressed might not reflect the best practices recommended by these Societies. This article should not be construed to represent the policies, positions, or opinions of their respective organizations, employers, or regulatory agencies.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/0192623319854040
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2256108654</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0192623319854040</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2256108654</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-582f224e29072e401a2ac78fcd45907f41a37d1db63d1e969081872aef8c1ee23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UU1LAzEQDaJord49SY5eVjPJfmS9ibUqFBWs5yUmszWym9TNrtibf8O_5y9xa6sHQRiYr_feMDxCDoAdA2TZCYOcp1wIyGUSs5htkAEkQkSQMtgkg-U6Wu53yG4Iz4yBhJhtkx0BPAcpkgH5mPo3q33lZ1bTO9U-LcsFHfumq0_p7dw66x3tY4TBzpxqv9uSnplXbAJS5Qy98U6t2ysbWj9fy1itKjq2zlg3C9Q6-n3Ltgt633bGYjil0yf8vdpTP98_Ah3ZCuta7ZGtUlUB99d5SB7GF9Pzq2hye3l9fjaJtMjyNkokLzmPkecs4xgzUFzpTJbaxEk_KmNQIjNgHlNhAPM0ZxJkxhWWUgMiF0NytNKdN_6lw9AWtQ0aq0o59F0oOE9SYDJN4h7KVlDd-BAaLIt5Y2vVLApgxdKQ4q8hPeVwrd491mh-CT8O9IBoBQhqhsWz7xrXf_u_4BfF25XI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2256108654</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Toxicologic Pathology Forum: Opinion on Designation of Adverse and Nonadverse Histopathological Findings in Toxicity Studies: The Pathologist’s Dilemma</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Gopinath, Chirukandath ; Mowat, Vasanthi</creator><creatorcontrib>Gopinath, Chirukandath ; Mowat, Vasanthi</creatorcontrib><description>In this opinion piece, we discuss some proposed principles for designating adversity and nonadversity of histopathological changes. The suggested approach categorizes the classes of findings noted in toxicity studies with illustrations and examples and suggests adversity or nonadversity for each class, in the authors’ opinions, with rationales. Although the suggestions and examples offered in this opinion piece are generally in agreement with Society of Toxicologic Pathology best practices guideline on adversity, the authors suggest and highlight occasional divergences and differences of opinion. This is because making an adversity call is a complex and challenging topic that is difficult to simplify. Some of the challenges in deciding on adversity are discussed, especially those related to making an adversity call on a histopathological finding in isolation, based on the nature and extent of severity. The authors demonstrate some of these situations with examples. Finally, the authors suggest, in contrast to the guidelines, occasional use of a separate category for findings that are less easily classified. *This is an opinion article submitted to the Toxicologic Pathology Forum. It represents the views of the author(s). It does not constitute an official position of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology, British Society of Toxicological Pathology, or European Society of Toxicologic Pathology, and the views expressed might not reflect the best practices recommended by these Societies. This article should not be construed to represent the policies, positions, or opinions of their respective organizations, employers, or regulatory agencies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0192-6233</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1533-1601</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0192623319854040</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31291835</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Congresses as Topic ; Pathology - methods ; Pathology - standards ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Toxicology - methods ; Toxicology - standards</subject><ispartof>Toxicologic pathology, 2019-07, Vol.47 (5), p.564-573</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-582f224e29072e401a2ac78fcd45907f41a37d1db63d1e969081872aef8c1ee23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-582f224e29072e401a2ac78fcd45907f41a37d1db63d1e969081872aef8c1ee23</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0705-7416</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0192623319854040$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0192623319854040$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31291835$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gopinath, Chirukandath</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mowat, Vasanthi</creatorcontrib><title>Toxicologic Pathology Forum: Opinion on Designation of Adverse and Nonadverse Histopathological Findings in Toxicity Studies: The Pathologist’s Dilemma</title><title>Toxicologic pathology</title><addtitle>Toxicol Pathol</addtitle><description>In this opinion piece, we discuss some proposed principles for designating adversity and nonadversity of histopathological changes. The suggested approach categorizes the classes of findings noted in toxicity studies with illustrations and examples and suggests adversity or nonadversity for each class, in the authors’ opinions, with rationales. Although the suggestions and examples offered in this opinion piece are generally in agreement with Society of Toxicologic Pathology best practices guideline on adversity, the authors suggest and highlight occasional divergences and differences of opinion. This is because making an adversity call is a complex and challenging topic that is difficult to simplify. Some of the challenges in deciding on adversity are discussed, especially those related to making an adversity call on a histopathological finding in isolation, based on the nature and extent of severity. The authors demonstrate some of these situations with examples. Finally, the authors suggest, in contrast to the guidelines, occasional use of a separate category for findings that are less easily classified. *This is an opinion article submitted to the Toxicologic Pathology Forum. It represents the views of the author(s). It does not constitute an official position of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology, British Society of Toxicological Pathology, or European Society of Toxicologic Pathology, and the views expressed might not reflect the best practices recommended by these Societies. This article should not be construed to represent the policies, positions, or opinions of their respective organizations, employers, or regulatory agencies.</description><subject>Congresses as Topic</subject><subject>Pathology - methods</subject><subject>Pathology - standards</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Toxicology - methods</subject><subject>Toxicology - standards</subject><issn>0192-6233</issn><issn>1533-1601</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UU1LAzEQDaJord49SY5eVjPJfmS9ibUqFBWs5yUmszWym9TNrtibf8O_5y9xa6sHQRiYr_feMDxCDoAdA2TZCYOcp1wIyGUSs5htkAEkQkSQMtgkg-U6Wu53yG4Iz4yBhJhtkx0BPAcpkgH5mPo3q33lZ1bTO9U-LcsFHfumq0_p7dw66x3tY4TBzpxqv9uSnplXbAJS5Qy98U6t2ysbWj9fy1itKjq2zlg3C9Q6-n3Ltgt633bGYjil0yf8vdpTP98_Ah3ZCuta7ZGtUlUB99d5SB7GF9Pzq2hye3l9fjaJtMjyNkokLzmPkecs4xgzUFzpTJbaxEk_KmNQIjNgHlNhAPM0ZxJkxhWWUgMiF0NytNKdN_6lw9AWtQ0aq0o59F0oOE9SYDJN4h7KVlDd-BAaLIt5Y2vVLApgxdKQ4q8hPeVwrd491mh-CT8O9IBoBQhqhsWz7xrXf_u_4BfF25XI</recordid><startdate>201907</startdate><enddate>201907</enddate><creator>Gopinath, Chirukandath</creator><creator>Mowat, Vasanthi</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0705-7416</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201907</creationdate><title>Toxicologic Pathology Forum: Opinion on Designation of Adverse and Nonadverse Histopathological Findings in Toxicity Studies: The Pathologist’s Dilemma</title><author>Gopinath, Chirukandath ; Mowat, Vasanthi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-582f224e29072e401a2ac78fcd45907f41a37d1db63d1e969081872aef8c1ee23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Congresses as Topic</topic><topic>Pathology - methods</topic><topic>Pathology - standards</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Toxicology - methods</topic><topic>Toxicology - standards</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gopinath, Chirukandath</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mowat, Vasanthi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Toxicologic pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gopinath, Chirukandath</au><au>Mowat, Vasanthi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Toxicologic Pathology Forum: Opinion on Designation of Adverse and Nonadverse Histopathological Findings in Toxicity Studies: The Pathologist’s Dilemma</atitle><jtitle>Toxicologic pathology</jtitle><addtitle>Toxicol Pathol</addtitle><date>2019-07</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>564</spage><epage>573</epage><pages>564-573</pages><issn>0192-6233</issn><eissn>1533-1601</eissn><abstract>In this opinion piece, we discuss some proposed principles for designating adversity and nonadversity of histopathological changes. The suggested approach categorizes the classes of findings noted in toxicity studies with illustrations and examples and suggests adversity or nonadversity for each class, in the authors’ opinions, with rationales. Although the suggestions and examples offered in this opinion piece are generally in agreement with Society of Toxicologic Pathology best practices guideline on adversity, the authors suggest and highlight occasional divergences and differences of opinion. This is because making an adversity call is a complex and challenging topic that is difficult to simplify. Some of the challenges in deciding on adversity are discussed, especially those related to making an adversity call on a histopathological finding in isolation, based on the nature and extent of severity. The authors demonstrate some of these situations with examples. Finally, the authors suggest, in contrast to the guidelines, occasional use of a separate category for findings that are less easily classified. *This is an opinion article submitted to the Toxicologic Pathology Forum. It represents the views of the author(s). It does not constitute an official position of the Society of Toxicologic Pathology, British Society of Toxicological Pathology, or European Society of Toxicologic Pathology, and the views expressed might not reflect the best practices recommended by these Societies. This article should not be construed to represent the policies, positions, or opinions of their respective organizations, employers, or regulatory agencies.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>31291835</pmid><doi>10.1177/0192623319854040</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0705-7416</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0192-6233
ispartof Toxicologic pathology, 2019-07, Vol.47 (5), p.564-573
issn 0192-6233
1533-1601
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2256108654
source MEDLINE; SAGE Complete; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Congresses as Topic
Pathology - methods
Pathology - standards
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Toxicology - methods
Toxicology - standards
title Toxicologic Pathology Forum: Opinion on Designation of Adverse and Nonadverse Histopathological Findings in Toxicity Studies: The Pathologist’s Dilemma
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T20%3A29%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Toxicologic%20Pathology%20Forum:%20Opinion%20on%20Designation%20of%20Adverse%20and%20Nonadverse%20Histopathological%20Findings%20in%20Toxicity%20Studies:%20The%20Pathologist%E2%80%99s%20Dilemma&rft.jtitle=Toxicologic%20pathology&rft.au=Gopinath,%20Chirukandath&rft.date=2019-07&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=564&rft.epage=573&rft.pages=564-573&rft.issn=0192-6233&rft.eissn=1533-1601&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0192623319854040&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2256108654%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2256108654&rft_id=info:pmid/31291835&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0192623319854040&rfr_iscdi=true