ToxSci Advance Access published online on February 2, 2005
Toxicological Sciences, doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfi099
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 European Commission, JRC - Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health & Consumer Protection, ECVAM - European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods, 21020 Ispra (VA), Italy
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. The assessment of relevance of toxicological testing was compared with approaches of diagnostic medicine, a discipline which faces a comparable situation. Considering the work of a toxicologist as setting a diagnosis for compounds, assessment tools for diagnostic tests were transferred to toxicological tests. In clinical diagnostics, test uncertainty is well accepted and incorporated in this assessment. Furthermore, prevalence information is considered to evaluate the gain in information resulting from the application of a test. Several common toxicological scenarios, in which test uncertainty and prevalence are combined, are discussed including the interdependence of test accuracy, prevalence and predictive values or the sequential application of a screening and a confirmatory test. In addition, real prevalences from prevalences determined by an imperfect test are presented. We conclude that information on prevalences of toxic health effects is required to allow a complete assessment of the relevance of toxicological test. In this process, lessons can be learned from evidence-based approaches in clinical diagnostics.
Received November 30, 2004
Accepted January 28, 2005
Review
Diagnosis: toxic! - Trying to apply approaches of clinical diagnostics and prevalence in toxicology considerations
2 European Commission, JRC - Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, ECVAM - European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods, Via E. Fermi 1, TP 580, 21020 Ispra (VA), Italy. Tel.: +39 0332 785939; Fax: +39 0332 786297
Thomas Hartung, E-mail: Thomas.HARTUNG{at}cec.eu.int
![]()
Abstract ![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. Hartung and G. Daston Are In Vitro Tests Suitable for Regulatory Use? Toxicol. Sci., October 1, 2009; 111(2): 233 - 237. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Hartung A Toxicology for the 21st Century--Mapping the Road Ahead Toxicol. Sci., May 1, 2009; 109(1): 18 - 23. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T Hartung 1 Fundamentals of a an evidence-based toxicology: 1.1 Opening statement Human and Experimental Toxicology, February 1, 2009; 28(2-3): 93 - 94. [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S Hoffmann 1.2 Aspects of test assessment Human and Experimental Toxicology, February 1, 2009; 28(2-3): 95 - 96. [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S Hoffmann and T Hartung Toward an evidence-based toxicology Human and Experimental Toxicology, September 1, 2006; 25(9): 497 - 513. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. O. Hansson and C. Ruden Priority Setting in the REACH System Toxicol. Sci., April 1, 2006; 90(2): 304 - 308. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||

