Combination of pathological, biochemical and behavioral evaluations for peripheral neurotoxicity assessment in

Akane Kashimura1,2, Satomi Nishikawa1, Yuhei Ozawa1

  • 1Safety Research Laboratories, Sohyaku, Innovative Research Division, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, Shonan Health Innovation Park, 2-26-1 Muraoka-Higashi, Fujisawa-shi, Kanagawa 251-8555, Japan.

Related Concept Videos

Drug Toxicity: Dose-Dependent Reactions01:24

Drug Toxicity: Dose-Dependent Reactions

Drug toxicities can be stratified into pharmacological, pathological, or genotoxic based on their mechanisms. The incidence and severity of these toxicities generally increase with the drug's concentration in the body and exposure time.Pharmacological toxicity is evident when the therapeutic effects of drugs overshoot into adverse reactions in a predictable, dose-dependent manner. Central nervous system (CNS) depression from barbiturates is a classic example, with effects escalating from...
245
Drug toxicity: Idiosyncratic Reactions01:16

Drug toxicity: Idiosyncratic Reactions

Idiosyncratic drug reactions represent abnormal chemical responses that vary significantly among individuals, ranging from extreme sensitivity to low doses to insensitivity to high doses. These reactions often occur due to the drug's covalent binding with serum proteins, forming a foreign hapten that triggers an immunotoxicological response. The variability in drug reactions has a strong pharmacogenetic foundation, with genetic differences crucial in how individuals metabolize drugs. For...
232
Toxicity Testing in Animals01:23

Toxicity Testing in Animals

Toxicity tests in animals are grounded on two main assumptions: first, the effects observed in laboratory animals can be extrapolated to humans, especially when adjusted for body surface area; second, high-dose exposure in animals is essential to identify potential human hazards from lower doses. This is based on the quantal dose-response concept, which faces the challenge of extrapolating results from relatively few test animals to much larger human populations. For example, a 0.01% incidence...
222