The work by Pognan and coauthors, “The Evolving Role of Investigative Toxicology in the Pharmaceutical Industry” is a thorough review of the current advancements in investigative toxicology, particularly within the context of pharmaceutical development. This is an interesting read in my opinion and I highly recommend it to the peers in the field.
While the paper effectively outlines the role of technological innovations such as microphysiological systems (MPS), induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), and advanced imaging techniques, there are several areas that could benefit from further clarification or deeper exploration:
1- The article highlights the importance of emerging technologies, but it could have been more helpful if it has discussed more explicitly the limitations of these new tools, particularly in their translation from preclinical models to clinical applications. For instance, while MPS and iPSCs are touted as “game-changers,” the long-term predictive value and scalability of these systems remain uncertain. There is a need for more in-depth analysis of how these technologies address the gap between in vitro and in vivo results.
2- The article occasionally presents a broad range of technologies but it would have been more helpful if it has sufficiently weighed their comparative strengths and weaknesses in specific toxicological contexts. A more structured comparison could have enhanced the reader’s understanding of how to best apply each tool depending on the drug candidate and the target organ of concern.
3- Finally, it would have been very interesting if the authors should share their case studies or real-world examples where these technologies have been successfully or unsuccessfully applied. This could provide valuable context for future discussions on their role in the pharmaceutical industry.