Comparison of Cramer classification between Toxtree, the OECD QSAR Toolbox and expert judgment

Examining predictors of chemical toxicity in freshwater fish using the random forest technique

Chemical pollution is one of the main issues globally threatening the enormous biodiversity of freshwater ecosystems. The toxicity of substances depends on many factors such as the chemical itself, the species affected, environmental conditions, exposure duration, and concentration. We used the random forest technique to examine the factors that mediate toxicity in a set of widespread fishes and analyses of covariance to further assess the importance of differential sensitivity among fish species. Among 13 variables, the 5 most important predictors of toxicity with random forests were, by order of importance, the chemical substance itself (i.e., Chemical Abstracts Service number considered as a categorical factor), octanol-water partition coefficient (log P), pollutant prioritization, ecological structure-activity relationship (ECOSAR) classification, and fish species for 50% lethal concentrations (LC₅₀) and the chemical substance, fish species, log P, ECOSAR classification, and water temperature for no observed effect concentrations (NOECs). Fish species was a very important predictor for both endpoints and with the two contrasting statistical techniques used. Different fish species displayed very different relationships with log P, often with different slopes and with as much importance as the partition coefficient. Therefore, caution should be exercised when extrapolating toxicological results or relationships among species. In addition, further research is needed to determine species-specific sensitivities and unravel the mechanisms behind them.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, isobornyl isovalerate, CAS registry number 7779-73-9

This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization potential, as well as, environmental safety. Data from the suitable read across analog isobornyl acetate (CAS # 125-12-2) show that this material is not genotoxic, provided a MOE > 100 for the repeated dose, developmental and reproductive endpoints, and does not have skin sensitization potential. The local respiratory toxicity endpoint was completed using the TTC (threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class II material (0.47 mg/day). The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethylene brassylate, CAS Registry Number 105-95-3

: The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data show that this material is not genotoxic nor does it have skin sensitization potential. The local respiratory toxicity endpoint was completed using the TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class I material (1.4 mg/day). The repeated dose toxicity endpoint was completed using ethylene dodecanedioate (CAS # 54982-83-1) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100. The developmental and reproductive toxicity endpoint was completed using oxacyclohexadec-12-en-2-one, (12E)- (CAS # 111879-80-2) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra along with data on the target material. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework along with data on the suitable read across analog oxacyclohexadec-12-en-2-one, (12E)- (CAS # 111879-80-2).

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3,7-dimethyl-1,6-nonadien-3-ol, CAS Registry Number 10339-55-6

The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data from the suitable read across analog linalool (CAS # 78-70-6) show that this material is not genotoxic nor does it have skin sensitization potential and also provided a MOE > 100 for the local respiratory endpoint. The repeated dose, developmental and reproductive toxicity endpoints were completed using nerolidol (isomer unspecified, CAS # 7212-44-4) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1-(1,2,3,4-tetrahydro-4,4-dimethyl-1-naphthyl)propan-1-one, CAS Registry Number 74499-60-8

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data from the target material and the suitable read across analog 6-acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline (CAS # 21145-77-7) show that this material is not genotoxic. Data from the suitable read across analog 6-acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline (CAS # 21145-77-7) provided a MOE > 100 for the repeat dose and developmental toxicity endpoints. The reproductive and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using the TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class II material (0.009 mg/kg/day and 0.47 mg/day, respectively). Data on the target material showed that this material is below the non-reactive DST for skin sensitization and did not have the potential for phototoxicity or photoallergenicity. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, l-linalool, CAS Registry Number 126-91-0

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization potential, as well as, environmental safety. Repeated dose toxicity was determined using a suitable read across analog to have the most conservative systemic exposure derived NO[A]EL of 36 mg/kg/day. A dermal 90-day subchronic toxicity study conducted in rats resulted in a MOE of 2250 while considering 14.4% absorption from skin contact and 100% from inhalation. A MOE of >100 is deemed acceptable.

Large-Scale Predictive Drug Safety: From Structural Alerts to Biological Mechanisms

The recent explosion of data linking drugs, proteins, and pathways with safety events has promoted the development of integrative systems approaches to large-scale predictive drug safety. The added value of such approaches is that, beyond the traditional identification of potentially labile chemical fragments for selected toxicity end points, they have the potential to provide mechanistic insights for a much larger and diverse set of safety events in a statistically sound nonsupervised manner, based on the similarity to drug classes, the interaction with secondary targets, and the interference with biological pathways. The combined identification of chemical and biological hazards enhances our ability to assess the safety risk of bioactive small molecules with higher confidence than that using structural alerts only. We are still a very long way from reliably predicting drug safety, but advances toward gaining a better understanding of the mechanisms leading to adverse outcomes represent a step forward in this direction.

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, Fenchyl alcohol, CAS registry number 1632-73-1

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization potential, as well as, environmental safety. Repeated dose toxicity was determined to have the most conservative systemic exposure derived NO[A]EL of 15 mg/kg/day. A gavage 13-week subchronic toxicity study conducted in rats on a suitable read across analog resulted in a MOE of 10,714 while assuming 100% absorption from skin contact and inhalation. A MOE of >100 is deemed acceptable.