Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The International Academy of Toxicologic Pathology (IATP) Satellite Symposium on Pathology Working Groups (PWGs) in Toxicologic Pathology, organized in the United Kingdom, addressed the value and importance of PWGs and expert working groups in assuring the accurate evaluation of chronic/carcinogenicity studies. These specialized panels of expert pathologists play a crucial role in confirming data quality and accurate interpretation in support of human safety and risk decisions of xenobiotics. While not every carcinogenicity bioassay may require a PWG to evaluate the quality and accuracy of study interpretation, it was the consensus of the workshop that it can be a highly valuable addition to traditional peer review. Performing a PWG should be given serious consideration, especially when it is anticipated that the chronic/carcinogenicity study will be used for making significant regulatory or business decisions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wolf et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: