Evaluation of in silico model predictions for mammalian acute oral toxicity and regulatory application in pesticide hazard and risk assessment

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) uses the lethal dose 50% (LD50) value from in vivo rat acute oral toxicity studies for pesticide product label precautionary statements and environmental risk assessment (RA). The Collaborative Acute Toxicity Modeling Suite (CATMoS) is a quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR)-based in silico approach to predict rat acute oral toxicity that has the potential to reduce animal use when registering a new pesticide technical grade active ingredient (TGAI). This analysis compared LD50 values predicted by CATMoS to empirical values from in vivo studies for the TGAIs of 177 conventional pesticides. The accuracy and reliability of the model predictions were assessed relative to the empirical data in terms of USEPA acute oral toxicity categories and discrete LD50 values for each chemical. CATMoS was most reliable at placing pesticide TGAIs in acute toxicity categories III (>500-5000 mg/kg) and IV (>5000 mg/kg), with 88% categorical concordance for 165 chemicals with empirical in vivo LD50 values ≥ 500 mg/kg. When considering an LD50 for RA, CATMoS predictions of 2000 mg/kg and higher were found to agree with empirical values from limit tests (i.e., single, high-dose tests) or definitive results over 2000 mg/kg with few exceptions.

Examining animal testing for risk assessment: A WC-12 workshop report

In toxicology and regulatory testing, the use of animal methods has been both a cornerstone and a subject of intense debate. To continue this discourse a panel and audience representing scientists from various sectors and countries convened at a workshop held during the 12th World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences (WC-12). The ensuing discussion focused on the scientific and ethical considerations surrounding the necessity and responsibility of defending the creation of new animal data in regulatory testing. The primary aim was to foster an open dialogue between the panel members and the audience while encouraging diverse perspectives on the responsibilities and obligations of various stakeholders (including industry, regulatory bodies, technology developers, research scientists, and animal welfare NGOs) in defending the development and subsequent utilization of new animal data. This workshop summary report captures the key elements from this critical dialogue and collective introspection. It describes the intersection of scientific progress and ethical responsibility as all sectors seek to accelerate the pace of 21st century predictive toxicology and new approach methodologies (NAMs) for the protection of human health and the environment.

Commentary: Revisiting nanoparticle-assay interference: There's plenty of room at the bottom for misinterpretation

Engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) are a diverse class of materials whose distinct properties make them desirable in a multitude of applications. The proliferation of nanotoxicology research has improved our understanding of ENM toxicity, but an under appreciation for their potential to interfere with biochemical assays has hampered progress in the field. The physicochemical properties of ENMs can promote their interaction with membranes or biomacromolecules (e.g. proteins, genomic material). This can influence the activity of enzymes used as biomarkers or as reagents in biochemical assay protocols, bind indicator dyes in cytotoxicity tests, and/or interfere with the cellular mechanisms controlling the uptake of such dyes. The spectral characteristics of some ENMs can cause interference with common assay chromophores, fluorophores, and radioisotope scintillation cocktails. Finally, the inherent chemical reactivity of some ENMs can short circuit assay mechanisms by directly oxidizing or reducing indicator dyes. These processes affect data quality and may lead to significant misinterpretations regarding ENM safety. We provide an overview of some ENM properties that facilitate assay interference, examples of interference and the erroneous conclusions that may result from it, and a number of general and specific recommendations for validating cellular and biochemical assay protocols in nanotoxicology studies.

Critical Review of Read-Across Potential in Testing for Endocrine-Related Effects in Vertebrate Ecological Receptors

Recent regulatory testing programs have been designed to evaluate whether a chemical has the potential to interact with the endocrine system and could cause adverse effects. Some endocrine pathways are highly conserved among vertebrates, providing a potential to extrapolate data generated for one vertebrate taxonomic group to others (i.e., biological read-across). To assess the potential for biological read-across, we reviewed tools and approaches that support species extrapolation for fish, amphibians, birds, and reptiles. For each of the estrogen, androgen, thyroid, and steroidogenesis (EATS) pathways, we considered the pathway conservation across species and the responses of endocrine-sensitive endpoints. The available data show a high degree of confidence in the conservation of the hypothalamus-pituitary-gonadal axis between fish and mammals and the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid axis between amphibians and mammals. Comparatively, there is less empirical evidence for the conservation of other EATS pathways between other taxonomic groups, but this may be due to limited data. Although more information on sensitive pathways and endpoints would be useful, current developments in the use of molecular target sequencing similarity tools and thoughtful application of the adverse outcome pathway concept show promise for further advancement of read-across approaches for testing EATS pathways in vertebrate ecological receptors. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020;39:739-753. © 2020 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of SETAC.

Qualification of a non-animal vaginal irritation method admitted as nonclinical assessment model (NAM) in the Incubator Phase of the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) Medical Devices Development Tool (MDDT)

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) classifies personal lubricants as Class II medical devices. Because of this status and the nature of body contact common to personal lubricants, CDRH reviewers routinely recommend a standard biocompatibility testing battery that includes: an in vivo rabbit vaginal irritation (RVI) test; an in vivo skin sensitization test, such as the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT); and an in vivo acute systemic toxicity test using mice or rabbits. These tests are conducted using live animals, despite the availability of in vitro and other non-animal test methods that may be suitable replacements. The only test included in the biocompatibility battery currently conducted using in vitro assay(s) is cytotoxicity. FDA's recently launched Predictive Toxicology Roadmap calls for the optimization of non-animal methods for the safety evaluation of drugs, consumer products and medical devices. In line with these goals, a Consortium comprising the Institute for In Vitro Sciences, Inc. (IIVS), industry, the Consumer Healthcare Products Association (CHPA), and the PETA International Science Consortium (PETA-ISC) is qualifying the use of an in vitro testing method as replacement for the RVI test. Participating companies include manufacturers of personal lubricants and those interested in the advancement of non-animal approaches working collaboratively with the FDA CDRH to develop an in vitro testing approach that could be used in place of the RVI in pre-market submissions. Personal lubricants and vaginal moisturizers with diverse chemical and physical properties (e.g., formulation, viscosity, pH, and osmolality) in their final undiluted form will be the focus of the program. In vitro vaginal irritation data generated using commercially available human reconstructed vaginal tissue model(s) will be paired with existing in vivo RVI data and analyzed to develop a Prediction Model for the safety assessment of these products. This research plan has been accepted into the FDA CDRH Medical Device Development Tools (MDDT) program as a potential non-clinical assessment model (NAM). The proposed NAM aligns with the goals of the recently launched FDA Roadmap to integrate predictive toxicology methods into safety and risk assessment with the potential to replace or reduce the use of animal testing.

Recommended criteria for the evaluation of bacterial mutagenicity data (Ames test)

A committee was constituted within the International Workshop on Genetic Toxicology Testing (IWGT) to evaluate the current criteria for a valid Ames test and to provide recommendations for interpretation of test results. Currently, determination of a positive vs. a negative result is made by applying various data evaluation procedures for comparing dosed plates with the concurrent solvent control plates. These evaluation procedures include a requirement for a specific fold increase (2- or 3-fold, specific to the bacterial strain), formal statistical procedures, or subjective (expert judgment) evaluation. After extensive discussion, the workgroup was not able to reach consensus recommendations in favor of any of these procedures. There was a consensus that combining additional evaluation criteria to the comparison between dosed plates and the concurrent solvent control plates improves test interpretation. The workgroup recommended using these additional criteria because the induction of mutations is a continuum of responses and there is no biological relevance to a strict dividing line between a positive (mutagenic) and not-positive (nonmutagenic) response. The most useful additional criteria identified were a concentration-response relationship and consideration of a possible increase above the concurrent control in the context of the laboratory's historical solvent control values for the particular tester strain. The workgroup also emphasized the need for additional testing to resolve weak or inconclusive responses, usually with altered experimental conditions chosen based on the initial results. Use of these multiple criteria allowed the workgroup to reach consensus on definitions of "clear positive" and "clear negative" responses which would not require a repeat test for clarification. The workgroup also reached consensus on recommendations to compare the responses of concurrent positive and negative controls to historical control distributions for assay acceptability, and the use of control charts to determine the validity of the individual test.

Review of achievements of the OECD Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials' Testing and Assessment Programme. From exploratory testing to test guidelines

This paper charts the almost ten years of history of OECD's work on nanosafety, during which the programme of the OECD on the Testing and Assessment of Manufactured Nanomaterials covered the testing of eleven nanomaterials for about 59 end-points addressing physical-chemical properties, mammalian and environmental toxicity, environmental fate and material safety. An overview of the materials tested, the test methods applied and the discussions regarding the applicability of the OECD test guidelines, which are recognised methods for regulatory testing of chemicals, are given. The results indicate that many existing OECD test guidelines are suitable for nanomaterials and consequently, hazard data collected using such guidelines will fall under OECD's system of Mutual Acceptance of Data (MAD) which is a legally binding instrument to facilitate the international acceptance of information for the regulatory safety assessment of chemicals. At the same time, some OECD test guidelines and guidance documents need to be adapted to address nanomaterials while new test guidelines and guidance documents may be needed to address endpoints that are more relevant to nanomaterials. This paper presents examples of areas where test guidelines or guidance for nanomaterials are under development.

Opportunities and strategies to further reduce animal use for Leptospira vaccine potency testing

Hamsters are routinely infected with virulent Leptospira for two purposes in the regulation of biologics: the performance of Codified potency tests and maintenance of challenge culture for the Codified potency tests. Options for reducing animal use in these processes were explored in a plenary lecture at the "International Workshop on Alternative Methods for Leptospira Vaccine Potency Testing: State of the Science and the Way Forward" held at the Center for Veterinary Biologics in September 2012. The use of validated in vitro potency assays such as those developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for Leptospira (L.) canicola, Leptospira grippotyphosa, Leptospira pomona, and Leptospira icterohaemorrhagiae rather than the Codified hamster vaccination-challenge assay was encouraged. Alternatives such as reduced animal numbers in the hamster vaccination-challenge testing were considered for problematic situations. Specifically, the merits of sharing challenge controls, reducing group sizes, and eliminating animals for concurrent challenge dose titration were assessed. Options for maintaining virulent, stable cultures without serial passage through hamsters or with decreased hamster use were also discussed. The maintenance of virulent Leptospira without the use of live animals is especially difficult since a reliable means to maintain virulence after multiple in vitro passages has not yet been identified.

USDA regulatory guidelines and practices for veterinary Leptospira vaccine potency testing

Batch-release potency testing of leptospiral vaccines licensed by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) historically was conducted through animal vaccination-challenge models. The hamster vaccination-challenge assay was Codified in 1974 for bacterins containing Leptospira pomona, Leptospira icterohaemorrhagiae, and Leptospira canicola, and in 1975 for bacterins containing Leptospira grippotyphosa. In brief, 10 hamsters are vaccinated with a specified dilution of bacterin. After a holding period, the vaccinated hamsters, as well as nonvaccinated controls, are challenged with virulent Leptospira and observed for mortality. Eighty percent of vaccinated hamsters must survive in the face of a valid challenge. The high cost of the Codified tests, in terms of monetary expense and animal welfare, prompted the Center for Veterinary Biologics (CVB) to develop ELISA alternatives for them. Potency tests for other serogroups, such as Leptospira hardjo-bovis, that do not have Codified requirements for potency testing continue to be examined on a case-by-case basis.