Assessment of reproductive and developmental effects of DINP, DnHP and DCHP using quantitative weight of evidence

Evaluation of animal toxicity studies with diisocyanates regarding presence of thresholds for induction and elicitation of respiratory allergy by quantitative weight of evidence

Animal toxicity studies on diisocyanates were evaluated using quantitative weight of evidence (QWoE) to test the hypothesis that the dose-response curve shows a threshold for the induction and/or elicitation of respiratory sensitization. A literature search identified 59 references that included at least two concentration groups of the diisocyanate and a vehicle-exposed concurrent control in the study design. These studies were subjected to a QWoE-assessment applying scoring criteria for quality and relevance/strength of effects relevant to the selected endpoint of respiratory sensitization. Overall, the studies assessing dose/concentration-response for diisocyanates with the endpoint, respiratory sensitization, were heterogenous regarding study design, animal models used, endpoints assessed, and quality. Only a limited number of the studies subjected to the QWoE-assessment allowed drawing conclusions about possible thresholds for respiratory sensitization. Highest quality and relevance/strength of effects scores were obtained by a series of studies specifically designed to investigate a potential threshold for elicitation of respiratory sensitization in the Brown Norway (BN) rat. These studies applied an elaborate study design to optimize induction of respiratory sensitization and reduce interference by respiratory tract irritation. In summary, the available studies provided moderate to good support for the existence of a threshold for elicitation and limited to moderate support for a threshold regarding induction of respiratory allergy by diisocyanates in experimental animals. However, a quantitative extrapolation of threshold values established in rodents to humans remains complex.

Open Science in regulatory environmental risk assessment

A possible way to alleviate the public skepticism toward regulatory science is to increase transparency by making all data and value judgments used in regulatory decision making accessible for public interpretation, ideally early on in the process, and following the concepts of Open Science. This paper discusses the opportunities and challenges in strengthening Open Science initiatives in regulatory environmental risk assessment (ERA). In this discussion paper, we argue that the benefits associated with Open Science in regulatory ERA far outweigh its perceived risks. All stakeholders involved in regulatory ERA (e.g., governmental regulatory authorities, private sector, academia, and nongovernmental organizations), as well as professional organizations like the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, can play a key role in supporting the Open Science initiative, by promoting the use of recommended reporting criteria for reliability and relevance of data and tools used in ERA, and by developing a communication strategy for both professionals and nonprofessionals to transparently explain the socioeconomic value judgments and scientific principles underlying regulatory ERA. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:1229-1242. © 2021 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Suggestions for Improving the Characterization of Risk from Exposures to Per and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances

Many state and federal environmental and health agencies have developed risk-based criteria for assessing the risk of adverse health effects of per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS) exposure to humans and the environment. However, the criteria that have been developed vary; drinking water criteria developed for perfluorooctanoic acid, for example, can vary by up to 750 fold. This is due to differences and variability in the data and information used, study/endpoint selection, assumptions and magnitude of uncertainty factors used in the absence and extrapolation of critical effect data, differences in underlying approaches to addressing exposure within criteria development, and/or policy decisions on levels of acceptable risk. We have critically evaluated the methods used to develop these criteria while focusing on derivation and application of drinking water criteria and discuss a range of improvements to risk-characterization practice recently presented at a Focused Topic Meeting on PFAS conducted by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry in Durham, North Carolina, USA, 12 to 15 August 2019. We propose methods that consider maximizing the use of disparate data streams, seeking patterns, and proposing biologically based approaches to evidence integration toward informed criteria development. Environ Toxicol Chem 2021;40:883-898. © 2020 SETAC.

A flow scheme for cumulative assessment of pesticides for adverse liver effects

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is developing approaches to cumulative risk assessment by assigning pesticides to cumulative assessment groups (CAGs). For assignment to CAGs, EFSA relies on common toxic effects (CTEs) on the target system. The developed flow scheme for assignment to liver CAGs sequentially assesses the consistency of the CTE, its adversity, its potential to be secondary to other toxicities, its human relevance, and the relation of the NOAEL for the CTE to the overall NOAEL. If the responses to all questions are "yes", allocation to a CAG is supported; "no" stops the process.

Grouping of phthalates for risk characterization of human exposures

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has developed a group tolerable daily intake (TDI) for low molecular weight phthalates (LWP) including diisononyl phthalate (DINP). The LWP covered by the group TDI induce clear adverse effects on rat testicular development and pronounced reductions in fetal testicular testosterone. In contrast, DINP has a very low potency regarding changes in testicular testosterone in fetal rodents and does not induce adverse effects on reproductive endpoints. The most sensitive toxicity endpoint for DINP is liver toxicity. Due to the much lower potency of DINP for effects on testosterone, absence of reproductive toxicity, and its noted liver toxicity as compared to the LWP in the group, DINP should not be included in the group TDI.

Quantitative weight of evidence method for combining predictions of quantitative structure-activity relationship models

A method for combining statistical-based QSAR predictions of two or more binary classification models is presented. It was assumed that all models were independent. This facilitated the combination of positive and negative predictions using a quantitative weight of evidence (qWoE) procedure based on Bayesian statistics and the additivity of the logarithms of the likelihood ratios. Previous studies combined more than one prediction but used arbitrary strengths for positive and negative predictions. In our approach, the combined models were validated by determining the sensitivity and specificity values, which are performance metrics that are a point of departure for obtaining values that measure the weight of evidence of positive and negative predictions. The developed method was experimentally applied in the prediction of Ames mutagenicity. The method achieved a similar accuracy to that of the experimental Ames test for this endpoint when the overall prediction was determined using a combination of the individual predictions of more than one model. Calculating the qWoE value would reduce the requirement for expert knowledge and decrease the subjectivity of the prediction. This method could be applied to other endpoints such as developmental toxicity and skin sensitisation with binary classification models.

Framework for the quantitative weight-of-evidence analysis of 'omics data for regulatory purposes

A framework for the quantitative weight-of-evidence (QWoE) analysis of 'omics data for regulatory purposes is presented. The QWoE framework encompasses seven steps to evaluate 'omics data (also together with non-'omics data): (1) Hypothesis formulation, identification and weighting of lines of evidence (LoEs). LoEs conjoin different (types of) studies that are used to critically test the hypothesis. As an essential component of the QWoE framework, step 1 includes the development of templates for scoring sheets that predefine scoring criteria with scores of 0-4 to enable a quantitative determination of study quality and data relevance; (2) literature searches and categorisation of studies into the pre-defined LoEs; (3) and (4) quantitative assessment of study quality and data relevance using the respective pre-defined scoring sheets for each study; (5) evaluation of LoE-specific strength of evidence based upon the study quality and study relevance scores of the studies conjoined in the respective LoE; (6) integration of the strength of evidence from the individual LoEs to determine the overall strength of evidence; (7) characterisation of uncertainties and conclusion on the QWoE. To put the QWoE framework in practice, case studies are recommended to confirm the relevance of its different steps, or to adapt them as necessary.