Making NAM-Based NGRA Assessments Accessible and Defensible

New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), including in vitro tests, computational models, and in silico tools, are transforming chemical safety assessment. In many cases, the required types of data are widely agreed upon, and this is becoming increasingly clear. What is less clear and (not yet standardized) is how this evidence is collected, combined, and reported within an NGRA (Next Generation Risk Assessment) framework. Many NAM-based assessments still rely on fragmented datasets and expert narratives. The science may be solid, but the reasoning can be difficult to follow, audit, or reproduce, creating unnecessary friction both internally and with regulators or clients.

The Alternative Safety Profiling Algorithm (ASPA) provides a structured workflow for assembling non-animal evidence into transparent, NGRA-aligned safety conclusions.

ASPA makes assessments:

• Accessible — by clearly documenting each step and decision

• Defensible — by making weight-of-evidence logic and uncertainty explicit

• Reusable — through a standardized, auditable structure

  
  

As expectations around NGRA continue to rise, the shift is no longer just toward animal-free methods. The shift is clear: the future of chemical safety lies in structured, accessible, and defensible decision logic. At Edelweiss Connect, we aim to be part of that future, working alongside teams to make NGRA assessments repeatable, auditable, and ready for regulators and clients.

ASPA reference: https://www.altex.org/index.php/altex/article/view/3041/

Is Your NAM-Based NGRA Workflow Defensible?

We’re offering a limited NGRA Defensibility Snapshot for teams implementing NAM-based assessments. Request a snapshot discussion →