Skip Navigation



ToxSci Advance Access published online on July 25, 2003

Toxicological Sciences, doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfg197
Toxicological Sciences © Society of Toxicology 2003; all rights reserved
This Article
Right arrow Advance Access manuscript (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
75/2/236    most recent
kfg197v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MacGregor, J. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by MacGregor, J. T.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Received May 21, 2003; accepted July 9, 2003
© 2003 Society of Toxicology

Forum

The Future of Regulatory Toxicology: Impact of the Biotechnology Revolution

James T. MacGregor 1*

1 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Center for Toxicological Research, Rockville, MD

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jmacgregor{at}nctr.fda.gov.


   Abstract

The molecular biology revolution and the advent of genomic and proteomic technologies are facilitating rapid advances in our understanding of the molecular details of cell and tissue function. These advances have the potential to transform toxicological and clinical practice, and are likely to lead to the supplementation or replacement of traditional biomarkers of cellular integrity, cell and tissue homeostasis, and morphological alterations that result from cell damage or death.

New technologies that permit simultaneous monitoring of many hundreds, or thousands, of macro- and small molecules ("-omics" technologies) promise to allow functional monitoring of multiple (or perhaps all) key cellular pathways simultaneously. Elucidation of cellular responses to molecular damage, including evolutionarily-conserved inducible molecular defense systems, suggests the possibility of new biomarkers based on molecular responses to functional perturbations and cellular damage. Our improved understanding of the molecular basis of various pathologies suggests that monitoring specific molecular responses may provide improved prediction of human outcomes. Responses that can be monitored directly in the human should provide "bridging biomarkers" that may eliminate much of the current uncertainty in extrapolating from laboratory models to human outcome.

Another aspect of genomics is our enhanced ability to associate DNA sequence variations with biological outcomes and individual sensitivity. The human genome sequence has revealed that sequence variations are very common, and may be an important determinant of variation in biological outcomes. The impending availability of a complete human haplotype map linked to standard genetic markers greatly facilitates identification of genetic variations that convey sensitivity or resistance to chemical exposures. Genetic approaches have already linked a large number of genetic variants (polymorphisms) with human diseases and adverse reactions from exposure to drugs or toxicants, suggesting an important role in sensitivity to drugs and environmental agents, disease susceptibilities, and therapeutic responses.

As these opportunities are transformed into reality, regulatory toxicological practice is likely to be shaped in the future by the combination of conventional pathology, toxicology, molecular genetics, biochemistry, cell biology, and computational bio-informatics--resulting in the broad application of molecular approaches to monitoring functional disturbances.

Key Words: toxicity, biomarkers, microarray, proteomics, genomics, metabonomics, polymorphism, haplotype, validation .


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Brief Funct Genomic ProteomicHome page
B. A. Merrick
The plasma proteome, adductome and idiosyncratic toxicity in toxicoproteomics research
Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic, February 12, 2008; (2008) eln004v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
C. C. Walker, K. A. Salinas, P. S. Harris, S. S. Wilkinson, J. D. Watts, and M. J. Hemmer
A Proteomic (SELDI-TOF-MS) Approach to Estrogen Agonist Screening
Toxicol. Sci., January 1, 2007; 95(1): 74 - 81.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol SciHome page
M. L. Cunningham and L. Lehman-McKeeman
Applying Toxicogenomics in Mechanistic and Predictive Toxicology
Toxicol. Sci., February 1, 2005; 83(2): 205 - 206.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Exp ToxicolHome page
J. M Battershill
Toxicogenomics: regulatory perspective on current position
Human and Experimental Toxicology, January 1, 2005; 24(1): 35 - 40.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Toxicol PatholHome page
J. T. Macgregor
Biomarkers of Cancer Risk and Therapeutic Benefit: New Technologies, New Opportunities, and Some Challenges
Toxicol Pathol, January 1, 2004; 32(1_suppl): 99 - 105.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.