Comparative Review of International Policy, Technological Trends, and Regulatory Acceptance of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs): Cases from the EU, US, and South Korea

Background: Animal testing has historically played a fundamental role in chemical safety assessment and drug development.However, growing concerns about animal welfare, scientific limitations, and societal acceptance have accelerated a global shift towards new approach methodologies (NAMs).These methods aim to reduce, refine, or replace animal use while enhancing predictive reliability and ethical standards in toxicology.Objectives: This review compares policy development, legal frameworks, technological advancements, and industrial application of NAMs in the European Union (EU), United States (US), and South Korea.It identifies key challenges impeding the uptake of NAMs and outlines future directions necessary for their effective implementation and global harmonization.Methods: A systematic review of official reports, peer-reviewed articles, and regulatory documents published between 2023 and April 2025 was conducted.The study focused on contrasting legal structures, regulatory agency roles, scientific and technological progress, international collaboration, and industrial adoption rates of NAMs across the three regions. Results:The EU leads with strong legislation and harmonized policies, achieving over 90% adoption of NAMs in single-dose toxicity testing.Under the FDA Modernization Act 2.0, the US supports the regulatory use of 200 NAM assays but faces challenges with complex toxicities.South Korea has expanded NAM adoption via reforms and pilot projects, yet SME uptake remains low at 18.2%, reflecting persistent barriers.Quantitative indicators (adoption, approval, standalone submission rates, cost reductions) have shown progress, but qualitative barriers-including gaps in infrastructure, validation, regulatory acceptance, industrial uptake, and data interoperability-limit broader adoption. Conclusions:NAMs are driving a shift toward more ethical and innovative toxicology by reducing animal testing.Accelerating global adoption requires improvements in quantitative outcomes alongside strengthening legal frameworks, method validation, global harmonization, industrial strategies, and standardized data management.Ongoing collaboration among governments, regulators, industry, and researchers is essential for addressing the remaining challenges and ensuring successful worldwide NAM implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Korean Journal of Environmental Health Sciences
Published
2025-08-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5668/jehs.2025.51.4.207
Primary Topic
Technology Assessment and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Review of International Policy, Technological Trends, and Regulatory Acceptance of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs): Cases from the EU, US, and South Korea

Yong-Sung Cho, Eun-Min Cho, Won-Yong Kwon, Jae Kyoun Kim et al.
1 links
Korean Journal of Environmental Health Sciences
Technology Assessment and Management
article

Comparative Review of International Policy, Technological Trends, and Regulatory Acceptance of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs): Cases from the EU, US, and South Korea

Yong-Sung Cho, Eun-Min Cho, Won-Yong Kwon, Jae Kyoun Kim, Sampan Lee
article en

Abstract

Background: Animal testing has historically played a fundamental role in chemical safety assessment and drug development.However, growing concerns about animal welfare, scientific limitations, and societal acceptance have accelerated a global shift towards new approach methodologies (NAMs).These methods aim to reduce, refine, or replace animal use while enhancing predictive reliability and ethical standards in toxicology.Objectives: This review compares policy development, legal frameworks, technological advancements, and industrial application of NAMs in the European Union (EU), United States (US), and South Korea.It identifies key challenges impeding the uptake of NAMs and outlines future directions necessary for their effective implementation and global harmonization.Methods: A systematic review of official reports, peer-reviewed articles, and regulatory documents published between 2023 and April 2025 was conducted.The study focused on contrasting legal structures, regulatory agency roles, scientific and technological progress, international collaboration, and industrial adoption rates of NAMs across the three regions. Results:The EU leads with strong legislation and harmonized policies, achieving over 90% adoption of NAMs in single-dose toxicity testing.Under the FDA Modernization Act 2.0, the US supports the regulatory use of 200 NAM assays but faces challenges with complex toxicities.South Korea has expanded NAM adoption via reforms and pilot projects, yet SME uptake remains low at 18.2%, reflecting persistent barriers.Quantitative indicators (adoption, approval, standalone submission rates, cost reductions) have shown progress, but qualitative barriers-including gaps in infrastructure, validation, regulatory acceptance, industrial uptake, and data interoperability-limit broader adoption. Conclusions:NAMs are driving a shift toward more ethical and innovative toxicology by reducing animal testing.Accelerating global adoption requires improvements in quantitative outcomes alongside strengthening legal frameworks, method validation, global harmonization, industrial strategies, and standardized data management.Ongoing collaboration among governments, regulators, industry, and researchers is essential for addressing the remaining challenges and ensuring successful worldwide NAM implementation.

Korean Journal of Environmental Health SciencesVol. 51(4)
Seokyeong University (KR)
Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Education, India, Korea Environmental Industry and Technology Institute
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Technology Assessment and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.