Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Dec;142(2):312-20.
doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfu199.

Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) development I: strategies and principles

Affiliations

Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) development I: strategies and principles

Daniel L Villeneuve et al. Toxicol Sci. 2014 Dec.

Abstract

An adverse outcome pathway (AOP) is a conceptual framework that organizes existing knowledge concerning biologically plausible, and empirically supported, links between molecular-level perturbation of a biological system and an adverse outcome at a level of biological organization of regulatory relevance. Systematic organization of information into AOP frameworks has potential to improve regulatory decision-making through greater integration and more meaningful use of mechanistic data. However, for the scientific community to collectively develop a useful AOP knowledgebase that encompasses toxicological contexts of concern to human health and ecological risk assessment, it is critical that AOPs be developed in accordance with a consistent set of core principles. Based on the experiences and scientific discourse among a group of AOP practitioners, we propose a set of five fundamental principles that guide AOP development: (1) AOPs are not chemical specific; (2) AOPs are modular and composed of reusable components-notably key events (KEs) and key event relationships (KERs); (3) an individual AOP, composed of a single sequence of KEs and KERs, is a pragmatic unit of AOP development and evaluation; (4) networks composed of multiple AOPs that share common KEs and KERs are likely to be the functional unit of prediction for most real-world scenarios; and (5) AOPs are living documents that will evolve over time as new knowledge is generated. The goal of the present article was to introduce some strategies for AOP development and detail the rationale behind these 5 key principles. Consideration of these principles addresses many of the current uncertainties regarding the AOP framework and its application and is intended to foster greater consistency in AOP development.

Keywords: adverse outcome pathway; extrapolation; knowledgebase; predictive toxicology; regulatory toxicology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.
Graphical representation of a generalized adverse outcome pathway (AOP; A). Each AOP is composed of two key components (B), key events (KEs) and key event relationships (KERs). Additionally, there are two specialized KEs, molecular initiating events (MIEs) and adverse outcomes (AOs) that anchor an AOP description. Individual AOPs sharing KEs or KERs can be represented as an AOP network (C). The AOP network depicted is composed of four individual AOPs, each representing a unique sequence of KEs linking an MIE to AO: AOP 1 [MIE1, KE1, KE2, KE3, AO1, AO2]; AOP 2 [MIE2, KE4, KE1, KE2, KE3, AO1, AO2]; AOP 3 [MIE1, KE1, KE2, KE5, KE6, AO3]; AOP 4 [MIE2, KE4, KE1, KE2, KE5, KE6, AO3]. Color image is available in the online version of the article.

References

    1. Ankley G. T., Bencic D., Breen M., Collette T. W., Connolly R., Denslow N. D., Edwards S., Ekman D. R., Jensen K. M., Lazorchak J., et al. (2009). Endocrine disrupting chemicals in fish: developing exposure indicators and predictive models of effects based on mechanisms of action. Aquat. Toxicol. 92, 168–178. - PubMed
    1. Ankley G. T., Bennett R. S., Erickson R. J., Hoff D. J., Hornung M. W., Johnson R. D., Mount D. R., Nichols J. W., Russom C. L., Schmieder P. K., et al. (2010). Adverse Outcome Pathways: a conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 29, 730–741. - PubMed
    1. Boobis A. R., Cohen S. M., Dellarco V., McGregor D., Meek M. E., Vickers C., Willcocks D., Farland W. (2006). IPCS framework for analyzing the relevance of a cancer mode of action for humans. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 36, 781–792. - PubMed
    1. Boobis A. R., Doe J. E., Heinrich-Hirsch B., Meek M. E., Munn S., Ruchirawat M., Schlatter J., Seed J., Vickers C. (2008). IPCS framework for analyzing the relevance of a noncancer mode of action for humans. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 38, 87–96. - PubMed
    1. Bradbury S. P., Feijtel T. C., Van Leeuwen C. J. (2004). Meeting the scientific needs of ecological risk assessment in a regulatory context. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38, 463A–470A. - PubMed

Publication types