The impact on classifications for carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, reproductive and specific target organ toxicity after repeated exposure in the first ten years of the REACH regulation

A modular strategy for the testing and assessment of non-genotoxic carcinogens

A modular strategy is described for the testing and assessment (MoSt) of non-genotoxic carcinogenicity (NGTxC) that is suitable for regulatory applications. It utilizes and builds upon work conducted by the OECD expert group on NGTxC. The approach integrates relevant test methods from the molecular- to cellular- and further to tissue level, many of which have been recently reviewed. Six progressive modules are included in the strategy. Advice is provided for the iterative selection of the next appropriate test method within each step of the strategy. Assessment is completed by a weight of evidence conclusion, which integrates the different streams of modular information. The assessment method gives higher weight to findings that are mechanistically linked with biological relevance to carcinogenesis. With a focus on EU-REACH, and pending upon successful test method validation and acceptance, this will also enable the MoSt for NGTxC to be applied for regulatory purposes across different regulatory jurisdictions.

Addressing chemical pollution in biodiversity research

Climate change, biodiversity loss, and chemical pollution are planetary-scale emergencies requiring urgent mitigation actions. As these "triple crises" are deeply interlinked, they need to be tackled in an integrative manner. However, while climate change and biodiversity are often studied together, chemical pollution as a global change factor contributing to worldwide biodiversity loss has received much less attention in biodiversity research so far. Here, we review evidence showing that the multifaceted effects of anthropogenic chemicals in the environment are posing a growing threat to biodiversity and ecosystems. Therefore, failure to account for pollution effects may significantly undermine the success of biodiversity protection efforts. We argue that progress in understanding and counteracting the negative impact of chemical pollution on biodiversity requires collective efforts of scientists from different disciplines, including but not limited to ecology, ecotoxicology, and environmental chemistry. Importantly, recent developments in these fields have now enabled comprehensive studies that could efficiently address the manifold interactions between chemicals and ecosystems. Based on their experience with intricate studies of biodiversity, ecologists are well equipped to embrace the additional challenge of chemical complexity through interdisciplinary collaborations. This offers a unique opportunity to jointly advance a seminal frontier in pollution ecology and facilitate the development of innovative solutions for environmental protection.

Hazard identification, classification, and risk assessment of carcinogens: too much or too little? - Report of an ECETOC workshop

The European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) organized a workshop "Hazard Identification, Classification and Risk Assessment of Carcinogens: Too Much or Too Little?" to explore the scientific limitations of the current binary carcinogenicity classification scheme that classifies substances as either carcinogenic or not. Classification is often based upon the rodent 2-year bioassay, which has scientific limitations and is not necessary to predict whether substances are likely human carcinogens. By contrast, tiered testing strategies founded on new approach methodologies (NAMs) followed by subchronic toxicity testing, as necessary, are useful to determine if a substance is likely carcinogenic, by which mode-of-action effects would occur and, for non-genotoxic carcinogens, the dose levels below which the key events leading to carcinogenicity are not affected. Importantly, the objective is not for NAMs to mimic high-dose effects recorded in vivo, as these are not relevant to human risk assessment. Carcinogenicity testing at the "maximum tolerated dose" does not reflect human exposure conditions, but causes major disturbances of homeostasis, which are very unlikely to occur at relevant human exposure levels. The evaluation of findings should consider biological relevance and not just statistical significance. Using this approach, safe exposures to non-genotoxic substances can be established.