Cargando…

The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives

In silico models have prompted considerable interest and debate because of their potential value in predicting the properties of chemical substances for regulatory purposes. The European REACH legislation promotes innovation and encourages the use of alternative methods, but in practice the use of i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Benfenati, Emilio, Diaza, Rodolfo Gonella, Cassano, Antonio, Pardoe, Simon, Gini, Giuseppina, Mays, Claire, Knauf, Ralf, Benighaus, Ludger
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3201894/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21982269
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1752-153X-5-58
_version_ 1782214935447601152
author Benfenati, Emilio
Diaza, Rodolfo Gonella
Cassano, Antonio
Pardoe, Simon
Gini, Giuseppina
Mays, Claire
Knauf, Ralf
Benighaus, Ludger
author_facet Benfenati, Emilio
Diaza, Rodolfo Gonella
Cassano, Antonio
Pardoe, Simon
Gini, Giuseppina
Mays, Claire
Knauf, Ralf
Benighaus, Ludger
author_sort Benfenati, Emilio
collection PubMed
description In silico models have prompted considerable interest and debate because of their potential value in predicting the properties of chemical substances for regulatory purposes. The European REACH legislation promotes innovation and encourages the use of alternative methods, but in practice the use of in silico models is still very limited. There are many stakeholders influencing the regulatory trajectory of quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) models, including regulators, industry, model developers and consultants. Here we outline some of the issues and challenges involved in the acceptance of these methods for regulatory purposes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3201894
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32018942011-10-26 The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives Benfenati, Emilio Diaza, Rodolfo Gonella Cassano, Antonio Pardoe, Simon Gini, Giuseppina Mays, Claire Knauf, Ralf Benighaus, Ludger Chem Cent J Commentary In silico models have prompted considerable interest and debate because of their potential value in predicting the properties of chemical substances for regulatory purposes. The European REACH legislation promotes innovation and encourages the use of alternative methods, but in practice the use of in silico models is still very limited. There are many stakeholders influencing the regulatory trajectory of quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) models, including regulators, industry, model developers and consultants. Here we outline some of the issues and challenges involved in the acceptance of these methods for regulatory purposes. BioMed Central 2011-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3201894/ /pubmed/21982269 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1752-153X-5-58 Text en Copyright ©2011 Benfenati et al
spellingShingle Commentary
Benfenati, Emilio
Diaza, Rodolfo Gonella
Cassano, Antonio
Pardoe, Simon
Gini, Giuseppina
Mays, Claire
Knauf, Ralf
Benighaus, Ludger
The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives
title The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives
title_full The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives
title_fullStr The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives
title_full_unstemmed The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives
title_short The acceptance of in silico models for REACH: Requirements, barriers, and perspectives
title_sort acceptance of in silico models for reach: requirements, barriers, and perspectives
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3201894/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21982269
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1752-153X-5-58
work_keys_str_mv AT benfenatiemilio theacceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT diazarodolfogonella theacceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT cassanoantonio theacceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT pardoesimon theacceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT ginigiuseppina theacceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT maysclaire theacceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT knaufralf theacceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT benighausludger theacceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT benfenatiemilio acceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT diazarodolfogonella acceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT cassanoantonio acceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT pardoesimon acceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT ginigiuseppina acceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT maysclaire acceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT knaufralf acceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives
AT benighausludger acceptanceofinsilicomodelsforreachrequirementsbarriersandperspectives