ToxCast InvitroDB 3.4 Release

This new release of the ToxCast database, invitrodb version 3.4, was originally frozen in December 2020 and reflects an update from the 2020 release of invitrodb version 3.3. Invitrodb version 3.4 is the backend data source for bioactivity in the new CompTox Chemicals Dashboard, to be released imminently.Science Inventory, CCTE products: https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_search_results.cfm?advSearch=true&showCriteria=2&keyword=CCTE&TIMSType=&TIMSSubTypeID=&epaNumber=&ombCat=Any&dateBeginPublishedPresented=07/01/2017&dateEndPublishedPresented=&dateBeginUpdated=&dateEndUpdated=&DEID=&personName=&personID=&role=Any&journalName=&journalID=&publisherName=&publisherID=&sortBy=pubDate&count=25</div

Software and Database Enhancements to ToxCast™ for Accessible Bioactivity Data for Toxicology

Presentation to the CompTox Communities of Practice January 2024Search for CCTE records in EPA’s Science Inventory by typing in the title at this link.https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_search_results.cfm?advSearch=true&showCriteria=2&keyword=CCTE&TIMSType=&TIMSSubTypeID=&epaNumber=&ombCat=Any&dateBeginPublishedPresented=07/01/2017&dateEndPublishedPresented=&dateBeginUpdated=&dateEndUpdated=&DEID=&personName=&personID=&role=Any&journalName=&journalID=&publisherName=&publisherID=&sortBy=pubDate&count</p

Defining uncertainty in publicly available high-throughput screening data from the ToxCast program

Poster presented at Society of Toxicology annual meeting March 201

Kinetic Parameters from Detection Probability in Single Molecule Force Spectroscopy

The detection probability of rupture events in AFM force spectroscopy measurements presents a viable alternative to standard methods for extracting kinetic parameters of dissociation. The detection probability has a maximum as a function of the probe velocity where (1) the probability to form a molecular bond is independent of the probe velocity and (2) the detection of rupture events is limited by noise and performed with a constant density of data points per distance of the probe displacement. This newly developed model indicates that the optimal detection velocity is independent of dissociation rate and depends on the distance to the barrier kinetic parameter. Therefore, the kinetic parameters of bond dissociation can be extracted from the dependence of detection probability on probe velocity and the detection threshold. This approach is sensitive to low rupture forces and therefore is complementary to the common most probable force data analysis approach. The developed approach is tested using rupture forces measured with specific bonds between biotin and streptavidin and with nonspecific bonds between linear alkanes in water. Results for the analysis of specific bonds rupture are consistent with the previous measurements, suggesting that rupture forces spanning a wide range of values originate from the same binding potential. Kinetic parameters obtained for linear alkanes are significantly different from previous measurements suggesting possible heterogeneity of the bound state

Domains covered in administered questionnaires.

BackgroundThe District of Columbia (DC) has striking disparities in maternal and infant outcomes comparing Black to White women and babies. Social determinants of health (SDoH) are widely recognized as a significant contributor to these disparities in health outcomes. Screening for social risk factors and referral for appropriate services is a critical step in addressing social needs and reducing outcome disparities.MethodsWe conducted interviews among employees (n = 18) and patients (n = 9) across three diverse, urban clinics within a healthcare system and one community-based organization involved in a five-year initiative to reduce maternal and infant disparities in DC. Interviews were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to understand current processes and organizational factors that contributed to or impeded delivery of social risk factor screening and referral for indicated needs.ResultsWe found that current processes for social risk factor screening and referral differed between and within clinics depending on the patient population. Key facilitators of successful screening included a supportive organizational culture and adaptability of more patient-centered screening processes. Key barriers to delivery included high patient volume and limited electronic health record capabilities to record results and track the status of internal and community referrals. Areas identified for improvement included additional social risk factor assessment training for new providers, patient-centered approaches to screening, improved tracking processes, and facilitation of connections to social services within clinical settings.ConclusionDespite proliferation of social risk factor screeners and recognition of their importance within health care settings, few studies detail implementation processes for social risk factor screening and referrals. Future studies should test implementation strategies for screening and referral services to address identified barriers to implementation.</div

Summary of social risk factor screening barriers, facilitators, and potential improvement suggestions.

Summary of social risk factor screening barriers, facilitators, and potential improvement suggestions.</p

Comparison of screening and referral across included sites.

Comparison of screening and referral across included sites.</p

Interview participants by department and role.

BackgroundThe District of Columbia (DC) has striking disparities in maternal and infant outcomes comparing Black to White women and babies. Social determinants of health (SDoH) are widely recognized as a significant contributor to these disparities in health outcomes. Screening for social risk factors and referral for appropriate services is a critical step in addressing social needs and reducing outcome disparities.MethodsWe conducted interviews among employees (n = 18) and patients (n = 9) across three diverse, urban clinics within a healthcare system and one community-based organization involved in a five-year initiative to reduce maternal and infant disparities in DC. Interviews were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to understand current processes and organizational factors that contributed to or impeded delivery of social risk factor screening and referral for indicated needs.ResultsWe found that current processes for social risk factor screening and referral differed between and within clinics depending on the patient population. Key facilitators of successful screening included a supportive organizational culture and adaptability of more patient-centered screening processes. Key barriers to delivery included high patient volume and limited electronic health record capabilities to record results and track the status of internal and community referrals. Areas identified for improvement included additional social risk factor assessment training for new providers, patient-centered approaches to screening, improved tracking processes, and facilitation of connections to social services within clinical settings.ConclusionDespite proliferation of social risk factor screeners and recognition of their importance within health care settings, few studies detail implementation processes for social risk factor screening and referrals. Future studies should test implementation strategies for screening and referral services to address identified barriers to implementation.</div

Consolidated framework for implementation research constructs used in employee interviews [35].

Consolidated framework for implementation research constructs used in employee interviews [35].</p

ToxCast’s invitroDB: Software and database enhancements to support continued integration and use of in vitro screening data

Presentation to SETAC on Nov. 13-17 in Pittsburgh, PA Science Inventory, CCTE products: https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_search_results.cfm?advSearch=true&showCriteria=2&keyword=CCTE&TIMSType=&TIMSSubTypeID=&epaNumber=&ombCat=Any&dateBeginPublishedPresented=07/01/2017&dateEndPublishedPresented=&dateBeginUpdated=&dateEndUpdated=&DEID=&personName=&personID=&role=Any&journalName=&journalID=&publisherName=&publisherID=&sortBy=pubDate&count=25 </p