1
|
Paege N, Feustel S, Marx-Stoelting P. Toxicological evaluation of microbial secondary metabolites in the context of European active substance approval for plant protection products. Environ Health 2024; 23:52. [PMID: 38835048 DOI: 10.1186/s12940-024-01092-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2024] [Accepted: 05/19/2024] [Indexed: 06/06/2024]
Abstract
Risk assessment (RA) of microbial secondary metabolites (SM) is part of the EU approval process for microbial active substances (AS) used in plant protection products (PPP). As the number of potentially produced microbial SM may be high for a certain microbial strain and existing information on the metabolites often are low, data gaps are frequently identified during the RA. Often, RA cannot conclusively clarify the toxicological relevance of the individual substances. This work presents data and RA conclusions on four metabolites, Beauvericin, 2,3-deepoxy-2,3-didehydro-rhizoxin (DDR), Leucinostatin A and Swainsonin in detail as examples for the challenging process of RA. To overcome the problem of incomplete assessment reports, RA of microbial AS for PPP is in need of new approaches. In view of the Next Generation Risk Assessment (NGRA), the combination of literature data, omic-methods, in vitro and in silico methods combined in adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) can be used for an efficient and targeted identification and assessment of metabolites of concern (MoC).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Norman Paege
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
| | - Sabrina Feustel
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Latz M, Böhme A, Ulrich N. Reactivity-based identification of oxygen containing functional groups of chemicals applied as potential classifier in non-target analysis. Sci Rep 2023; 13:22828. [PMID: 38129561 PMCID: PMC10739825 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-50240-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2023] [Accepted: 12/17/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023] Open
Abstract
In this work, we developed a reactivity-based strategy to identify functional groups of unknown analytes, which can be applied as classifier in non-target analysis with gas chromatography. The aim of this strategy is to reduce the number of potential candidate structures generated for a molecular formula determined by high resolution mass spectrometry. We selected an example of 18 isomers with the molecular formula C12H10O2 to test the performance of different derivatization reagents, whereas our aim was to select mild and fast reaction conditions. Based on the results for the isomers, we developed a four-step workflow for the identification of functional groups containing oxygen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Milena Latz
- Department of Ecological Chemistry, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, 04318, Leipzig, Germany
- Faculty of Chemistry and Mineralogy, Leipzig University, 04103, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Alexander Böhme
- Department of Ecological Chemistry, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, 04318, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Nadin Ulrich
- Department of Ecological Chemistry, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, 04318, Leipzig, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Muncke J, Andersson AM, Backhaus T, Belcher SM, Boucher JM, Carney Almroth B, Collins TJ, Geueke B, Groh KJ, Heindel JJ, von Hippel FA, Legler J, Maffini MV, Martin OV, Peterson Myers J, Nadal A, Nerin C, Soto AM, Trasande L, Vandenberg LN, Wagner M, Zimmermann L, Thomas Zoeller R, Scheringer M. A vision for safer food contact materials: Public health concerns as drivers for improved testing. ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL 2023; 180:108161. [PMID: 37758599 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2023] [Revised: 08/17/2023] [Accepted: 08/17/2023] [Indexed: 09/29/2023]
Abstract
Food contact materials (FCMs) and food contact articles are ubiquitous in today's globalized food system. Chemicals migrate from FCMs into foodstuffs, so called food contact chemicals (FCCs), but current regulatory requirements do not sufficiently protect public health from hazardous FCCs because only individual substances used to make FCMs are tested and mostly only for genotoxicity while endocrine disruption and other hazard properties are disregarded. Indeed, FCMs are a known source of a wide range of hazardous chemicals, and they likely contribute to highly prevalent non-communicable diseases. FCMs can also include non-intentionally added substances (NIAS), which often are unknown and therefore not subject to risk assessment. To address these important shortcomings, we outline how the safety of FCMs may be improved by (1) testing the overall migrate, including (unknown) NIAS, of finished food contact articles, and (2) expanding toxicological testing beyond genotoxicity to multiple endpoints associated with non-communicable diseases relevant to human health. To identify mechanistic endpoints for testing, we group chronic health outcomes associated with chemical exposure into Six Clusters of Disease (SCOD) and we propose that finished food contact articles should be tested for their impacts on these SCOD. Research should focus on developing robust, relevant, and sensitive in-vitro assays based on mechanistic information linked to the SCOD, e.g., through Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) or Key Characteristics of Toxicants. Implementing this vision will improve prevention of chronic diseases that are associated with hazardous chemical exposures, including from FCMs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jane Muncke
- Food Packaging Forum Foundation, Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - Anna-Maria Andersson
- Dept. of Growth and Reproduction, Rigshospitalet and Centre for Research and Research Training in Male Reproduction and Child Health (EDMaRC), Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Thomas Backhaus
- Dept of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Scott M Belcher
- Dept. of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
| | | | | | | | - Birgit Geueke
- Food Packaging Forum Foundation, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Ksenia J Groh
- Department of Environmental Toxicology, Eawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Dübendorf, Switzerland
| | - Jerrold J Heindel
- Healthy Environment and Endocrine Disruptor Strategies, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Frank A von Hippel
- Mel & Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
| | - Juliette Legler
- Dept. of Population Health Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | - Olwenn V Martin
- Plastic Waste Innovation Hub, Department of Arts and Science, University College London, UK
| | - John Peterson Myers
- Dept. of Chemistry, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Environmental Health Sciences, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Angel Nadal
- IDiBE and CIBERDEM, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, Alicante, Spain
| | - Cristina Nerin
- Dept. of Analytical Chemistry, I3A, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - Ana M Soto
- Department of Immunology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; Centre Cavaillès, Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France
| | - Leonardo Trasande
- College of Global Public Health and Grossman School of Medicine and Wagner School of Public Service, New York University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Laura N Vandenberg
- Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health & Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA
| | - Martin Wagner
- Dept. of Biology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| | | | - R Thomas Zoeller
- Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health & Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA
| | - Martin Scheringer
- RECETOX, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic; Department of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zurich, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Schmeisser S, Miccoli A, von Bergen M, Berggren E, Braeuning A, Busch W, Desaintes C, Gourmelon A, Grafström R, Harrill J, Hartung T, Herzler M, Kass GEN, Kleinstreuer N, Leist M, Luijten M, Marx-Stoelting P, Poetz O, van Ravenzwaay B, Roggeband R, Rogiers V, Roth A, Sanders P, Thomas RS, Marie Vinggaard A, Vinken M, van de Water B, Luch A, Tralau T. New approach methodologies in human regulatory toxicology - Not if, but how and when! ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL 2023; 178:108082. [PMID: 37422975 PMCID: PMC10858683 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108082] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 58.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2023] [Revised: 06/30/2023] [Accepted: 07/01/2023] [Indexed: 07/11/2023]
Abstract
The predominantly animal-centric approach of chemical safety assessment has increasingly come under pressure. Society is questioning overall performance, sustainability, continued relevance for human health risk assessment and ethics of this system, demanding a change of paradigm. At the same time, the scientific toolbox used for risk assessment is continuously enriched by the development of "New Approach Methodologies" (NAMs). While this term does not define the age or the state of readiness of the innovation, it covers a wide range of methods, including quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) predictions, high-throughput screening (HTS) bioassays, omics applications, cell cultures, organoids, microphysiological systems (MPS), machine learning models and artificial intelligence (AI). In addition to promising faster and more efficient toxicity testing, NAMs have the potential to fundamentally transform today's regulatory work by allowing more human-relevant decision-making in terms of both hazard and exposure assessment. Yet, several obstacles hamper a broader application of NAMs in current regulatory risk assessment. Constraints in addressing repeated-dose toxicity, with particular reference to the chronic toxicity, and hesitance from relevant stakeholders, are major challenges for the implementation of NAMs in a broader context. Moreover, issues regarding predictivity, reproducibility and quantification need to be addressed and regulatory and legislative frameworks need to be adapted to NAMs. The conceptual perspective presented here has its focus on hazard assessment and is grounded on the main findings and conclusions from a symposium and workshop held in Berlin in November 2021. It intends to provide further insights into how NAMs can be gradually integrated into chemical risk assessment aimed at protection of human health, until eventually the current paradigm is replaced by an animal-free "Next Generation Risk Assessment" (NGRA).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Andrea Miccoli
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany; National Research Council, Ancona, Italy
| | - Martin von Bergen
- Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Leipzig, Germany; German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany; University of Leipzig, Faculty of Life Sciences, Institute of Biochemistry, Leipzig, Germany
| | | | - Albert Braeuning
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany
| | - Wibke Busch
- Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research-UFZ, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Christian Desaintes
- European Commission (EC), Directorate General for Research and Innovation (RTD), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Anne Gourmelon
- Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Environment Directorate, Paris, France
| | | | - Joshua Harrill
- Center for Computational Toxicology and Exposure (CCTE), United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Durham, USA
| | - Thomas Hartung
- Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT), Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Baltimore MD USA, CAAT-Europe, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
| | - Matthias Herzler
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Nicole Kleinstreuer
- NTP Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), Durham, USA
| | - Marcel Leist
- CAAT‑Europe and Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany
| | - Mirjam Luijten
- Centre for Health Protection, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Oliver Poetz
- NMI Natural and Medical Science Institute at the University of Tuebingen, Reutlingen, Germany; SIGNATOPE GmbH, Reutlingen, Germany
| | | | - Rob Roggeband
- European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA), Procter and Gamble Services Company NV/SA, Strombeek-Bever, Belgium
| | - Vera Rogiers
- Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Adrian Roth
- F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Pascal Sanders
- Fougeres Laboratory, French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES), Fougères, France France
| | - Russell S Thomas
- Center for Computational Toxicology and Exposure (CCTE), United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Durham, USA
| | | | | | | | - Andreas Luch
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany
| | - Tewes Tralau
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Arnold W, Blum A, Branyan J, Bruton TA, Carignan CC, Cortopassi G, Datta S, DeWitt J, Doherty AC, Halden RU, Harari H, Hartmann EM, Hrubec TC, Iyer S, Kwiatkowski CF, LaPier J, Li D, Li L, Muñiz Ortiz JG, Salamova A, Schettler T, Seguin RP, Soehl A, Sutton R, Xu L, Zheng G. Quaternary Ammonium Compounds: A Chemical Class of Emerging Concern. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 2023; 57:7645-7665. [PMID: 37157132 PMCID: PMC10210541 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.2c08244] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 56.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2022] [Revised: 03/24/2023] [Accepted: 03/24/2023] [Indexed: 05/10/2023]
Abstract
Quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs), a large class of chemicals that includes high production volume substances, have been used for decades as antimicrobials, preservatives, and antistatic agents and for other functions in cleaning, disinfecting, personal care products, and durable consumer goods. QAC use has accelerated in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the banning of 19 antimicrobials from several personal care products by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2016. Studies conducted before and after the onset of the pandemic indicate increased human exposure to QACs. Environmental releases of these chemicals have also increased. Emerging information on adverse environmental and human health impacts of QACs is motivating a reconsideration of the risks and benefits across the life cycle of their production, use, and disposal. This work presents a critical review of the literature and scientific perspective developed by a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional team of authors from academia, governmental, and nonprofit organizations. The review evaluates currently available information on the ecological and human health profile of QACs and identifies multiple areas of potential concern. Adverse ecological effects include acute and chronic toxicity to susceptible aquatic organisms, with concentrations of some QACs approaching levels of concern. Suspected or known adverse health outcomes include dermal and respiratory effects, developmental and reproductive toxicity, disruption of metabolic function such as lipid homeostasis, and impairment of mitochondrial function. QACs' role in antimicrobial resistance has also been demonstrated. In the US regulatory system, how a QAC is managed depends on how it is used, for example in pesticides or personal care products. This can result in the same QACs receiving different degrees of scrutiny depending on the use and the agency regulating it. Further, the US Environmental Protection Agency's current method of grouping QACs based on structure, first proposed in 1988, is insufficient to address the wide range of QAC chemistries, potential toxicities, and exposure scenarios. Consequently, exposures to common mixtures of QACs and from multiple sources remain largely unassessed. Some restrictions on the use of QACs have been implemented in the US and elsewhere, primarily focused on personal care products. Assessing the risks posed by QACs is hampered by their vast structural diversity and a lack of quantitative data on exposure and toxicity for the majority of these compounds. This review identifies important data gaps and provides research and policy recommendations for preserving the utility of QAC chemistries while also seeking to limit adverse environmental and human health effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William
A. Arnold
- University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, United States
| | - Arlene Blum
- Green
Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, California 94709, United States
- University
of California, Berkeley, California 94720, United States
| | - Jennifer Branyan
- California
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Sacramento, California 95814, United States
| | - Thomas A. Bruton
- California
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Sacramento, California 95814, United States
| | | | - Gino Cortopassi
- University
of California, Davis, California 95616, United States
| | - Sandipan Datta
- University
of California, Davis, California 95616, United States
| | - Jamie DeWitt
- East
Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina 27834, United States
| | - Anne-Cooper Doherty
- California
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Sacramento, California 95814, United States
| | - Rolf U. Halden
- Arizona
State University, Tempe, Arizona 85287, United States
| | - Homero Harari
- Icahn
School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York 10029, United States
| | | | - Terry C. Hrubec
- Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine, Blacksburg, Virginia 24060, United States
| | - Shoba Iyer
- California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Oakland, California 94612, United States
| | - Carol F. Kwiatkowski
- Green
Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, California 94709, United States
- North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695 United States
| | - Jonas LaPier
- Green
Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, California 94709, United States
| | - Dingsheng Li
- University
of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557, United States
| | - Li Li
- University
of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557, United States
| | | | - Amina Salamova
- Indiana University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322, United States
| | - Ted Schettler
- Science and Environmental Health Network, Bolinas, California 94924, United States
| | - Ryan P. Seguin
- University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, United States
| | - Anna Soehl
- Green
Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, California 94709, United States
| | - Rebecca Sutton
- San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, California 94804, United States
| | - Libin Xu
- University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, United States
| | - Guomao Zheng
- Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518055, China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bǎlan S, Andrews DQ, Blum A, Diamond ML, Fernández SR, Harriman E, Lindstrom AB, Reade A, Richter L, Sutton R, Wang Z, Kwiatkowski CF. Optimizing Chemicals Management in the United States and Canada through the Essential-Use Approach. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 2023; 57:1568-1575. [PMID: 36656107 PMCID: PMC9893722 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.2c05932] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2022] [Indexed: 05/25/2023]
Abstract
Chemicals have improved the functionality and convenience of industrial and consumer products, but sometimes at the expense of human or ecological health. Existing regulatory systems have proven to be inadequate for assessing and managing the tens of thousands of chemicals in commerce. A different approach is urgently needed to minimize ongoing production, use, and exposures to hazardous chemicals. The premise of the essential-use approach is that chemicals of concern should be used only in cases in which their function in specific products is necessary for health, safety, or the functioning of society and when feasible alternatives are unavailable. To optimize the essential-use approach for broader implementation in the United States and Canada, we recommend that governments and businesses (1) identify chemicals of concern for essentiality assessments based on a broad range of hazard traits, going beyond toxicity; (2) expedite decision-making by avoiding unnecessary assessments and strategically asking up to three questions to determine whether the use of the chemical in the product is essential; (3) apply the essential-use approach as early as possible in the process of developing and assessing chemicals; and (4) engage diverse experts in identifying chemical uses and functions, assessing alternatives, and making essentiality determinations and share such information broadly. If optimized and expanded into regulatory systems in the United States and Canada, other policymaking bodies, and businesses, the essential-use approach can improve chemicals management and shift the market toward safer chemistries that benefit human and ecological health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona
A. Bǎlan
- California
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Sacramento, California 95814, United States
- University
of California, Berkeley, California 94720, United States
| | - David Q. Andrews
- Environmental
Working Group, Washington, D.C. 20005, United States
| | - Arlene Blum
- University
of California, Berkeley, California 94720, United States
- Green
Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, California 94709, United States
| | | | | | - Elizabeth Harriman
- University
of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, Massachusetts 01852, United States
| | | | - Anna Reade
- Natural
Resources Defense Council, San Francisco, California 94104, United States
| | | | - Rebecca Sutton
- San
Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, California 94804, United States
| | - Zhanyun Wang
- Empa-Swiss
Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology,
Technology and Society Laboratory, 9014 St. Gallen, Switzerland
- Institute of Environmental Engineering,
ETH Zurich, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Carol F. Kwiatkowski
- Green
Science Policy Institute, Berkeley, California 94709, United States
- North
Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Herzler M, Marx-Stoelting P, Pirow R, Riebeling C, Luch A, Tralau T, Schwerdtle T, Hensel A. Reply to the opinion paper "The EU chemicals strategy for sustainability: an opportunity to develop new approaches for hazard assessment" by Scholz et al. Arch Toxicol 2022; 96:2387-2390. [PMID: 35687126 PMCID: PMC9217875 DOI: 10.1007/s00204-022-03319-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2022] [Accepted: 05/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Herzler
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Str. 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Philip Marx-Stoelting
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Str. 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany
| | - Ralph Pirow
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Str. 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany
| | - Christian Riebeling
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Str. 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany
| | - Andreas Luch
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Str. 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany
| | - Tewes Tralau
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Str. 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany
| | - Tanja Schwerdtle
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Str. 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany
| | - Andreas Hensel
- German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Str. 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|