The RAINBOW workshop addressed the background for the integration of in vivo, in vitro and computer-based (in silico) methods, to facilitate the study of the toxic properties of chemicals. On the basis of these discussions, we prepared the present paper, outlining the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of each approach, both alone and integrated into a single testing strategy. The current scheme for evaluation of chemicals needs to be reshaped, in the face of the much larger numbers of chemicals which need to be examined and the availability of a diversified set of tools.
European Commission (2006). Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC. Official Journal of the European UnionL396, 30.12.2006, 1–849. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/l_396/l_39620061230en00010849.pdf (Accessed 05.03.10).
2.
CroninM.T.D. & LivingstoneD.J. (2004). Predicting Chemical Toxicity and Fate, 472pp. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
3.
VermeireT.G., AlbenbergT., DangZ., JanerG., de KneckJ.A., PeijnenburgW.J.G.M., PiersmaA.H., TraasT.P., VerschoorA.J., van ZijverdenM. & HakertB. (2007). Selected Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS) for Risk Assessment of Chemicals. RIVM-report 601050001/2007, 160pp. Bilthoven, The Netherlands: RIVM.
4.
BallsM., BlaauboerB., BrusickD., FrazierJ., LambD., PembertonM., ReinhardtC., RoberfroidM., RosenkranzH., SchmidB., SpielmannH., StammatiA.L. & WalumE. (1990). Report and recommendations of the CAAT/ERGATT workshop on validation of toxicity test procedures. ATLA18, 303–337.
5.
BallsM., BlaauboerB., FentemJ.H., BrunerL., CombesR.D., EkwallB., FielderR.J., GuillouzoA., LewisR.W., LovellD.P., RepettoG., SladowskiD., SpielmannH. & ZuccoF. (1995). Practical aspects of the validation of toxicity test procedures. The report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 5. ATLA23, 129–147.
6.
OECD (2005). Guidance Document on the Validation and International Acceptance of New or Updated Test Methods for Hazard Identification. Environmental Health and Safety Monograph Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 34, 96pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
7.
HartungT., BremerS., CasatiS., CoeckeS., CorviR., FortanerS., GribaldoL., HalderM., HoffmannS., Janusch-RoiA., PrietoP., SabbioniE., ScottL., WorthA. & ZuangV. (2004). A modular approach to the ECVAM principles on test validity. ATLA32, 467–472.
8.
OECD (2007). Guidance Document on the Validation of (Q)SAR Models. Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 69, 154pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
9.
WeedD.L. (2005). Weight of evidence: A review of concepts and methods. Risk Analysis25, 1545–1557.
10.
BenfenatiE. (2007). The quality criteria of the DEMETRA models for regulatory purposes. In Quantitative Structure–Activity Relationships for Pesticide Regulatory Purposes (ed. BenfenatiE.), pp. 283–302. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
11.
BenfenatiE. (2007). The specificity of the QSAR models for regulatory purposes: The example of the DEMETRA project. SAR & QSAR in Environmental Research18, 209–220.
12.
Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche ‘Mario Negri’ (undated). CAESAR: Computer Assisted Evaluation of Industrial Chemical Substances According to Regulations. A Project funded by the European Commission, contract number 022674 (SSPI). Available at: http://www.caesar-project.eu (Accessed 05.03.10).
13.
RudénC. (2003). Scrutinizing ACGIH risk assessment: The trichloroethylene case. American Journal of Industrial Medicine44, 207–213.
14.
GuzelianP.S., VictoroffM.S., HalmesN.C., JanesR.C. & GuzelianC.P. (2005). Evidence-based toxicology: a comprehensive framework for causation. Human & Experimental Toxicology24, 161–201.
15.
HoffmannS. & HartungT. (2006). Toward an evidence-based toxicology. Human & Experimental Toxicology25, 497–513.
16.
Van LeewenK. (2007). General introduction. In Risk Assessment of Chemicals: An Introduction (ed. van LeeuwenC.J. & VermeireT.G.), pp. 1–36. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
17.
HrovatH., HelmutS. & JeramS. (2009). Variability of in vivo fish acute toxicity data. Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology54, 294–300.
18.
PiegorshW.W. & ZeigerE. (1991). Measuring intra-assay agreement for the Ames Salmonella Assay. In Statistical Methods in Toxicology. Lecture Notes in Medical Informatics (ed. HotornL.) pp. 35–41. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
19.
BenfenatiE., PiclinN., RoncaglioniA. & VarìM.R. (2001). Factors influencing predictive models for toxicology. SAR & QSAR in Environmental Research12, 593–603.
20.
BenfenatiE., GiniG., PiclinN., RoncaglioniA. & VarìM.R. (2003). Predicting LogP of pesticides using different software. Chemosphere53, 1155–1164.
21.
BenfenatiE. (2004). Modelling aquatic toxicity with advanced computational techniques: procedures to standardize data and compare models. In Knowledge Exploration in Life Science Informatics. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (ed. LopezJ.A., BenfenatiE. & DubitzkyW.), pp. 235–248. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
22.
ZhaoC., BorianiE., ChanaA., RoncaglioniA. & BenfenatiE. (2008). A new hybrid QSAR model for predicting bioconcentration factor (BCF). Chemosphere73, 1701–1707.
23.
FerrariT., GiniG. & BenfenatiE. (2009). Support vector machines in the prediction of mutagenicity of chemical compounds, 6pp. In Proceedings of the North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society (NAFIPS) 2009 meeting, doi 10.1109/NAFIPS.2009.5156478. Los Alamitos, CA, USA: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). Available at: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=5156478 (Accessed 05.03.10).
PedersenF., de BruijnJ., MunnS. & van LeeuwenK. (2003). Assessment of Additional Testing Needs under REACH. Effects of QSARs, Risk Based Testing and Voluntary Industry Initiatives, 36pp. Ispra, Italy: European Commission, Joint Research Centre.
27.
HartungT. & RovidaC. (2009). Chemical regulators have overreached. Nature, London460, 1080–1081.
US EPA (2009). The ToxCast™ Program. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: US Environmental Protection Agency Computational Toxicology Program. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/ncct/toxcast/ (Accessed 10.10.09).
30.
CalabreseE.J., BaldwinL.A., KosteckiP.T. & PotterT.L. (1997). A toxicologically based weight-of-evidence methodology for the relative ranking of chemicals of endocrine disruption potential. Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology26, 36–40.
31.
MenzieC., HenningM.H., CuraJ., FinkelsteinK., GentileJ., MaughanJ., MitchellD., PetronS., PotockiB., SvirskyS. & TylerP. (1996). Special report of the Massachusetts weight-of-evidence workgroup: A weight-of-evidence approach for evaluating ecological risks. Human & Ecological Risk Assessment (HERA)2, 277–304.
