Results of a round-robin exercise on read-across

References

• European Union, Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission.
   Google Scholar
• ECHA, Technical Guidance Documents for the Implementation of REACH. Guidance on Information Requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment, European Chemical Agency, Helsinki, Finland, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• T.W. Schultz, P. Amcoff, E. Berggen, F. Gautier, M. Klaric, D.J. Knight, C. Mahony, M. Schwarz, A. White, and M.T.D. Cronin, A strategy for constructing and reporting a read-across prediction of toxicity, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 72 (2015), pp. 586–601.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ECHA, The use of alternatives to testing on animals for the REACH Regulation - Second report under Article 117(3) of the REACH Regulation, ECHA-14-A-07-EN. European Chemical Agency, Helsinki, Finland, 2014. Available at http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13639/alternatives_test_animals_2014_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• ECHA, Read-Across Assessment Framework (RAAF), ECHA/PR/15/07, European Chemical Agency, Helsinki, Finland, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• OECD, Guidance on grouping of chemicals. OECD Series on Testing and Assessment No. 80, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• OECD, Guidance on grouping of chemicals. OECD Series on Testing and Assessment No. 194, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• N. Ball, M. Bartels, R. Budinsky, J. Klapacz, S. Hays, and C. Kirman, The challenge of using read-across within the EU REACH regulatory framework; how much uncertainty is too much? Dipropylene glycol methyl ether acetate, an exemplary case study, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 68 (2014), pp. 212–221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.I. Cappelli, A. Cassano, A. Golbamaki, Y. Moggio, A. Lombardo, M. Colafranceschi, and E. Benfenati, Assessment of in silico models for acute aquatic toxicity towards fish under REACH legislation, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 26 (2015), pp. 977–999.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.I. Cappelli, E. Benfenati, and J. Cester, Evaluation of QSAR models for predicting the partition coefficient (log P) of chemicals under the REACH regulation, Environ. Res. 143 (2015), pp. 26–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C.I. Cappelli, S. Manganelli, A. Lombardo, A. Gissi, and E. Benfenati, Validation of quantitative structure-activity relationships models to predict water-solubility of organic compounds, Sci. Total Environ. 463-464 (2013), pp. 781–789.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M.I. Petoumenou, F. Pizzo, J. Cester, A. Fernández, and E. Benfenati, Comparison between bioconcentration factor (BCF) data provided by industry to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and data derived from QSAR models, Environ. Res. 142 (2015), pp. 529–534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Cassano, G. Raitano, E. Mombelli, A. Fernández, J. Cester, A. Roncaglioni, and E. Benfenati, Evaluation of QSAR models for the prediction of Ames genotoxicity: A retrospective exercise on the chemical substances registered under the EU REACH regulation, J. Environ. Sci. Health C, Environ. Carcinog. Ecotoxicol. Rev. 32 (2014), pp. 273–298.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Gissi, A. Lombardo, A. Roncaglioni, D. Gadaleta, G.F. Mangiatordi, O. Nicolotti, and E. Benfenati, Evaluation and comparison of benchmark QSAR models to predict a relevant REACH endpoint: The bioconcentration factor (BCF), Environ. Res. 137 (2015), pp. 398–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Gonella Diaza, S. Manganelli, A. Esposito, A. Roncaglioni, A. Manganaro, and E. Benfenati, Comparison of in silico tools for evaluating rat oral acute toxicity, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 26 (2015), pp. 1–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. Golbamaki Bakhtyari, G. Raitano, E. Benfenati, and T.M. Martin, and D. Young, Comparison of in silico models for prediction of mutagenicity, J. Environ. Sci. Health. C, Environ. Carcinog. Ecotoxicol. Rev. 31 (2013), pp. 45–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Milan, O. Schifanella, A. Roncaglioni, and E. Benfenati, Comparison and possible use of in silico tools for carcinogenicity within REACH legislation, J. Environ. Sci. Health. C. 29 (2011), pp. 300–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• F. Pizzo, A. Lombardo, A. Manganaro, and E. Benfenati, In silico models for predicting ready biodegradability under REACH: A comparative study, Sci. Total Environ. 463–464 (2013), pp. 161–168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Gini, A.M. Franchi., A. Manganaro, A. Golbamaki, and E. Benfenati, ToxRead: A tool to assist in read-across and its use to assess mutagenicity of chemicals, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 25 (2014), pp. 999–1011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Benfenati, A. Roncaglioni, M.I. Petoumenou, C.I. Cappelli, and G. Gini, Integrating QSAR and read-across for environmental assessmen, SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 26 (2015), pp. 605–618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Benfenati, S. Manganelli, S. Giordano, G. Raitano, and A. Manganaro, Hierarchical rules for read-across and in silico models of mutagenicity, J. Environ. Sci. Health C, Environ. Carcinog. Ecotoxicol. Rev. 33 (2015), pp. 385–403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar