@article{BauerMallyLiedtke2021, author = {Bauer, Benedikt and Mally, Angela and Liedtke, Daniel}, title = {Zebrafish embryos and larvae as alternative animal models for toxicity testing}, series = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences}, volume = {22}, journal = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences}, number = {24}, issn = {1422-0067}, doi = {10.3390/ijms222413417}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-284225}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Prerequisite to any biological laboratory assay employing living animals is consideration about its necessity, feasibility, ethics and the potential harm caused during an experiment. The imperative of these thoughts has led to the formulation of the 3R-principle, which today is a pivotal scientific standard of animal experimentation worldwide. The rising amount of laboratory investigations utilizing living animals throughout the last decades, either for regulatory concerns or for basic science, demands the development of alternative methods in accordance with 3R to help reduce experiments in mammals. This demand has resulted in investigation of additional vertebrate species displaying favourable biological properties. One prominent species among these is the zebrafish (Danio rerio), as these small laboratory ray-finned fish are well established in science today and feature outstanding biological characteristics. In this review, we highlight the advantages and general prerequisites of zebrafish embryos and larvae before free-feeding stages for toxicological testing, with a particular focus on cardio-, neuro, hepato- and nephrotoxicity. Furthermore, we discuss toxicokinetics, current advances in utilizing zebrafish for organ toxicity testing and highlight how advanced laboratory methods (such as automation, advanced imaging and genetic techniques) can refine future toxicological studies in this species.}, language = {en} } @article{BarileBerryBlaauboeretal.2021, author = {Barile, Frank A. and Berry, Colin and Blaauboer, Bas and Boobis, Alan and Bolt, Herrmann M. and Borgert, Christopher and Dekant, Wolfgang and Dietrich, Daniel and Domingo, Jose L. and Galli, Corrado L. and Gori, Gio Batta and Greim, Helmut and Hengstler, Jan G. and Heslop-Harrison, Pat and Kacew, Sam and Marquardt, Hans and Mally, Angela and Pelkonen, Olavi and Savolainen, Kai and Testai, Emanuela and Tsatsakis, Aristides and Vermeulen, Nico P.}, title = {The EU chemicals strategy for sustainability: in support of the BfR position}, series = {Archives of Toxicology}, volume = {95}, journal = {Archives of Toxicology}, number = {9}, issn = {0340-5761}, doi = {10.1007/s00204-021-03125-w}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-307154}, pages = {3133-3136}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The EU chemicals strategy for sustainability (CSS) asserts that both human health and the environment are presently threatened and that further regulation is necessary. In a recent Guest Editorial, members of the German competent authority for risk assessment, the BfR, raised concerns about the scientific justification for this strategy. The complexity and interdependence of the networks of regulation of chemical substances have ensured that public health and wellbeing in the EU have continuously improved. A continuous process of improvement in consumer protection is clearly desirable but any initiative directed towards this objective must be based on scientific knowledge. It must not confound risk with other factors in determining policy. This conclusion is fully supported in the present Commentary including the request to improve both, data collection and the time-consuming and bureaucratic procedures that delay the publication of regulations.}, language = {en} } @article{DekantLangerLuppetal.2021, author = {Dekant, Raphael and Langer, Michael and Lupp, Maria and Adaku Chilaka, Cynthia and Mally, Angela}, title = {In vitro and in vivo analysis of ochratoxin A-derived glucuronides and mercapturic acids as biomarkers of exposure}, series = {Toxins}, volume = {13}, journal = {Toxins}, number = {8}, issn = {2072-6651}, doi = {10.3390/toxins13080587}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-245146}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Ochratoxin A (OTA) is a widespread food contaminant, with exposure estimated to range from 0.64 to 17.79 ng/kg body weight (bw) for average consumers and from 2.40 to 51.69 ng/kg bw per day for high consumers. Current exposure estimates are, however, associated with considerable uncertainty. While biomarker-based approaches may contribute to improved exposure assessment, there is yet insufficient data on urinary metabolites of OTA and their relation to external dose to allow reliable estimates of daily intake. This study was designed to assess potential species differences in phase II biotransformation in vitro and to establish a correlation between urinary OTA-derived glucuronides and mercapturic acids and external exposure in rats in vivo. In vitro analyses of OTA metabolism using the liver S9 of rats, humans, rabbits and minipigs confirmed formation of an OTA glucuronide but provided no evidence for the formation of OTA-derived mercapturic acids to support their use as biomarkers. Similarly, OTA-derived mercapturic acids were not detected in urine of rats repeatedly dosed with OTA, while indirect analysis using enzymatic hydrolysis of the urine samples prior to LC-MS/MS established a linear relationship between urinary glucuronide excretion and OTA exposure. These results support OTA-derived glucuronides but not mercapturic acids as metabolites suitable for biomonitoring.}, language = {en} } @article{GuthHueserRothetal.2021, author = {Guth, Sabine and H{\"u}ser, Stephanie and Roth, Angelika and Degen, Gisela and Diel, Patrick and Edlund, Karolina and Eisenbrand, Gerhard and Engel, Karl-Heinz and Epe, Bernd and Grune, Tilman and Heinz, Volker and Henle, Thomas and Humpf, Hans-Ulrich and J{\"a}ger, Henry and Joost, Hans-Georg and Kulling, Sabine E. and Lampen, Alfonso and Mally, Angela and Marchan, Rosemarie and Marko, Doris and M{\"u}hle, Eva and Nitsche, Michael A. and R{\"o}hrdanz, Elke and Stadler, Richard and van Thriel, Christoph and Vieths, Stefan and Vogel, Rudi F. and Wascher, Edmund and Watzl, Carsten and N{\"o}thlings, Ute and Hengstler, Jan G.}, title = {Contribution to the ongoing discussion on fluoride toxicity}, series = {Archives of Toxicology}, volume = {95}, journal = {Archives of Toxicology}, number = {7}, issn = {0340-5761}, doi = {10.1007/s00204-021-03072-6}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-307161}, pages = {2571-2587}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Since the addition of fluoride to drinking water in the 1940s, there have been frequent and sometimes heated discussions regarding its benefits and risks. In a recently published review, we addressed the question if current exposure levels in Europe represent a risk to human health. This review was discussed in an editorial asking why we did not calculate benchmark doses (BMD) of fluoride neurotoxicity for humans. Here, we address the question, why it is problematic to calculate BMDs based on the currently available data. Briefly, the conclusions of the available studies are not homogeneous, reporting negative as well as positive results; moreover, the positive studies lack control of confounding factors such as the influence of well-known neurotoxicants. We also discuss the limitations of several further epidemiological studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria of our review. Finally, it is important to not only focus on epidemiological studies. Rather, risk analysis should consider all available data, including epidemiological, animal, as well as in vitro studies. Despite remaining uncertainties, the totality of evidence does not support the notion that fluoride should be considered a human developmental neurotoxicant at current exposure levels in European countries.}, language = {en} }