Table 1.
Exposure NAM class | Description | Traditional Approach | Makes use of |
|||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Measurement | Toxicokinetics | Models | Descriptors | Evaluation | Machine learning | |||
| ||||||||
Measurements | New techniques including screening analyses capable of detecting hundreds of chemicals present in a sample | Targeted (chemical-specific) analyses | – | • | • | • | • | |
Toxicokinetics | High-throughput methods using in vitro data to generate chemical-specific models | Analyses based on in vivo animal studies | • | – | • | • | ||
HTE models | Models capable of making predictions for thousands of chemicals | Models requiring detailed, chemical- and scenario- specific information | • | • | – | • | ||
Chemical descriptors | Informatic approaches for organizing chemical information in a machine- readable format | Tools targeted at single- chemical analyses by humans | – | • | ||||
Evaluation | Statistical approaches that use the data from many chemicals to estimate the uncertainty in a prediction for a new chemical | Comparison of model predictions to data on a per- chemical basis | • | • | • | • | – | • |
Machine learning | Computer algorithms to identify patterns | Manual inspection of the data | • | • | • | – | ||
Prioritization | Integration of exposure and other NAMs to identify chemicals for follow-up study | Expert decision-making | • | • | • | • | • | • |
HTE, high-throughput exposure; NAMs, new approach methodologies.
We describe six broad categories of NAMs that are being used or applied to inform exposure along with other chemical risk prioritization NAMs (Table 1).
• indicates that the NAM also makes use of the NAM in the indicated column, while - indicates that these are the same NAM.