Search

Two specific developmental events, namely implantation and palatal shelf closure, are of specific interest because they define, respectively, the beginning and the end of the treatment period in embryo-fetal developmental toxicity studies for pharmaceutical products. Thus, a detailed evaluation of the timing of implantation and closure of the hard palate is necessary to assure use of the proper exposure window in developmental toxicity studies in rabbits, the nonrodent species most commonly evaluated in regulatory developmental toxicology studies. The purpose of this study was to determine the timeline for implantation and closure of the hard palate in the New Zealand White rabbit, and to determine if this timeline differed in the Japanese White rabbit. To describe the timing of implantation, the uteri from does of the New Zealand White rabbit and the Japanese White rabbit were examined on gestation days (GDs) 5 through 8 for macroscopic evidence of implantation. To assess palatal shelf closure, fetuses were removed on GDs 17, 18, and 19 and fixed in Bouin's solution. The fetuses were then categorized into five stages of palatal shelf closure: open (Stage I); approach of the palatal shelves (Stage II); partial closure of the hard palate (Stage III); full closure of the hard palate (Stage IV); and full closure of the soft palate (Stage V). In both the New Zealand White and Japanese White rabbit strains, implantation was initiated on GD 6.5 and was completed on GD 7. Partial closure of the palate began on GD 17.5, and by GD 19, closure of the hard palate was completed in all fetuses, and closure of the soft palate was completed in 75-96% of the fetuses. The timing of implantation and palatal shelf closure were comparable between the New Zealand White rabbit and the Japanese White rabbit. Therefore, treatment beginning on GD 7 and continuing until GD 19 encompasses the period of major organogenesis and is considered appropriate for use in developmental toxicity studies using either of these two strains of rabbits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The Berlin Workshops have a 25 year history of bringing together experts on developmental toxicity. • Improving categorization of developmental effects is crucial for harmonization and risk assessment. • Developing AOPs is a fundamental improvement to guide screening and testing for DNT. • More interdisciplinary research will accelerate new technologies to test developmental toxicity. 25 years after the first Berlin Workshop on Developmental Toxicity this 10th Berlin Workshop aimed to bring together international experts from authorities, academia and industry to consider scientific, methodologic and regulatory aspects in risk assessment of developmental toxicity and to debate alternative strategies in testing developmental effects in the future. Proposals for improvement of the categorization of developmental effects were discussed as well as the update of the DevTox database as valuable tool for harmonization. The development of adverse outcome pathways relevant to developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) was debated as a fundamental improvement to guide the screening and testing for DNT using alternatives to animal methods. A further focus was the implementation of an in vitro mechanism-based battery, which can support various regulatory applications associated with the assessment of chemicals and mixtures. More interdisciplinary and translation research should be initiated to accelerate the development of new technologies to test developmental toxicity. Technologies in the pipeline are (i) high throughput imaging techniques, (ii) models for DNT screening tests, (iii) use of computer tomography for assessment of thoracolumbar supernumerary ribs in animal models, and (iv) 3D biofabrication of bone development and regeneration tissue models. In addition, increased collaboration with the medical community was suggested to improve the relevance of test results to humans and identify more clinically relevant endpoints. Finally, the participants agreed that this conference facilitated better understanding innovative approaches that can be useful for the identification of developmental health risks due to exposure to chemical substances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This update (version 2) of the Terminology of developmental abnormalities in common laboratory mammals (version 1) by Wise et al. [Wise LD, Beck SL, Beltrame D, Beyer BK, Chahoud I, Clark RL, Clark R, Druga AM, Fueston MH, Guittin P, Henwood SM, Kimmel CA, Lindstrom P, Palmer AK, Petrere JA, Solomon HM, Yasuda M, York RG. Terminology of developmental abnormalities in common laboratory mammals (version 1). Teratology 1997;55:249–92] incorporates improvements and enhancements to both content and organization of the terminology, to enable greater flexibility in its application, while maintaining a consistent approach to the description of findings. The revisions are the result of an international collaboration among interested organizations, advised by individual experts and the outcomes of several workshops. The terminology remains organized into tables under the broad categories of external, visceral, and skeletal observations, following the manner in which data are typically collected and recorded in developmental toxicity studies. This arrangement of the tables, as well as other information provided in appendices, is intended to facilitate the process of specimen evaluation at the laboratory bench level. Only the commonly used laboratory mammals (i.e., rats, mice, rabbits) are addressed in the current terminology tables. The inclusion of other species that are used in developmental toxicity testing, such as primates, is considered outside the scope of the present update. Similarly, categorization of findings as, for example, “malformation” or “variation” remains unaddressed, in accordance with the overall principle that the focus of this document is descriptive terminology and not diagnosis/interpretation. The skeletal terms have been augmented to accommodate cartilage findings. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]