Incorporating New Technologies Into Toxicity Testing and Risk Assessment: Moving From 21st Century Vision to a Data-Driven Framework

Based on existing data and previous work, a series of studies is proposed as a basis toward a pragmatic early step in transforming toxicity testing. These studies were assembled into a data-driven framework that invokes successive tiers of testing with margin of exposure (MOE) as the primary metric. The first tier of the framework integrates data from high-throughput in vitro assays, in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) pharmacokinetic modeling, and exposure modeling. The in vitro assays are used to separate chemicals based on their relative selectivity in interacting with biological targets and identify the concentration at which these interactions occur. The IVIVE modeling converts in vitro concentrations into external dose for calculation of the point of departure (POD) and comparisons to human exposure estimates to yield a MOE. The second tier involves short-term in vivo studies, expanded pharmacokinetic evaluations, and refined human exposure estimates. The results from the second tier studies provide more accurate estimates of the POD and the MOE. The third tier contains the traditional animal studies currently used to assess chemical safety. In each tier, the POD for selective chemicals is based primarily on endpoints associated with a proposed mode of action, whereas the POD for nonselective chemicals is based on potential biological perturbation. Based on the MOE, a significant percentage of chemicals evaluated in the first 2 tiers could be eliminated from further testing. The framework provides a risk-based and animal-sparing approach to evaluate chemical safety, drawing broadly from previous experience but incorporating technological advances to increase efficiency

Managing Evidence in Food Safety and Nutrition

Evidence ('data') is at the heart of EFSA's 2020 Strategy and is addressed in three of its operational objectives: (1) adopt an open data approach, (2) improve data interoperability to facilitate data exchange, and (3) migrate towards structured scientific data. As the generation and availability of data have increased exponentially in the last decade, potentially providing a much larger evidence base for risk assessments, it is envisaged that the acquisition and management of evidence to support future food safety risk assessments will be a dominant feature of EFSA's future strategy. During the breakout session on 'Managing evidence' of EFSA's third Scientific Conference 'Science, Food, Society', current challenges and future developments were discussed in evidence management applied to food safety risk assessment, accounting for the increased volume of evidence available as well as the increased IT capabilities to access and analyse it. This paper reports on presentations given and discussions held during the session, which were centred around the following three main topics: (1) (big) data availability and (big) data connection, (2) problem formulation and (3) evidence integration. (C) 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority

Linear low-dose extrapolation for noncancer health effects is the exception, not the rule

The nature of the exposure-response relationship has a profound influence on risk analyses. Several arguments have been proffered as to why all exposure-response relationships for both cancer and noncarcinogenic end-points should be assumed to be linear at low doses. We focused on three arguments that have been put forth for noncarcinogens. First, the general “additivity-to-background” argument proposes that if an agent enhances an already existing disease-causing process, then even small exposures increase disease incidence in a linear manner. This only holds if it is related to a specific mode of action that has nonuniversal properties—properties that would not be expected for most noncancer effects. Second, the “heterogeneity in the population” argument states that variations in sensitivity among members ofthe target population tend to “flatten out and linearize” the exposure-response curve, but this actually only tends to broaden, not linearize, the dose-response relationship. Third, it has been argued that a review of epidemiological evidence shows linear or no-threshold effects at low exposures in humans, despite nonlinear exposure-response in the experimental dose range in animal testing for similar endpoints. It is more likely that this is attributable to exposure measurement error rather than a true non-threshold association. Assuming that every chemical is toxic at high exposures and linear at low exposures does not comport to modern-day scientific knowledge of biology. There is no compelling evidence-based justification for a general low-exposure linearity; rather, case-specific mechanistic arguments are needed

Adverse outcome pathways: application to enhance mechanistic understanding of neurotoxicity

Recent developments have prompted the transition of empirically based testing of late stage toxicity in animals for a range of different endpoints including neurotoxicity to more efficient and predictive mechanistically based approaches with greater emphasis on measurable key events early in the progression of disease. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) has been proposed as a simplified organizational construct to contribute to this transition by linking molecular initiating events and earlier (more predictive) key events at lower levels of biological organization to disease outcomes. As such, AOPs are anticipated to facilitate the compilation of information to increase mechanistic understanding of pathophysiological pathways that are responsible for human disease. In this review, the sequence of key events resulting in adverse outcome (AO) defined as parkinsonian motor impairment and learning and memory deficit in children, triggered by exposure to environmental chemicals has been briefly described using the AOP framework. These AOPs follow convention adopted in an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) AOP development program, publically available, to permit tailored application of AOPs for a range of different purposes. Due to the complexity of disease pathways, including neurodegenerative disorders, specific symptom of the disease (e.g. parkinsonian motor deficit) is considered as the AO in devel-oped AOP. Though the description is necessarily limited by the extent of current knowledge, additional characterization of involved pathways through description of related AOPs interlinked into networks for the same disease has potential to contribute to more holistic and mechanistic understanding of the pathophysiological pathways involved, possibly leading to the mechanism-based reclassification of this diseases, thus facilitating more personalized treatment.JRC.F.3-Chemicals Safety and Alternative Method

Weight of Evidence for Hazard Identification: A critical review of the literature

International audienceBACKGROUND: Transparency when documenting and assessing weight of evidence (WOE) has been an area of increasing focus for national and international health agencies. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this work was to conduct a critical review of WOE analysis methods as a basis for developing a practical framework for considering and assessing WOE in hazard identification in areas of application at the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES). METHODS: Based on a review of the literature and directed requests to 63 international and national agencies, 116 relevant articles and guidance documents were selected. The WOE approaches were assessed based on three aspects: the extent of their prescriptive nature, their purpose-specific relevance, and their ease of implementation. RESULTS: Twenty-four approaches meeting the specified criteria were identified from selected reviewed documents. :Most approaches satisfied one or two of the assessed considerations, but not all three. The approaches were grouped within a practical framework comprising the following four stages: (1) planning the assessment, including scoping, formulating the question, and developing the assessment method; (2) establishing lines of evidence (EOEs), including identifying and selecting studies, assessing their quality, and integrating with studies of similar type; (3) integrating the LOEs to evaluate WOE; and (4) presenting conclusions. DISCUSSION: Based on the review, considerations for selecting methods for a wide range of applications are proposed. Priority areas for further development are identified. https:/doi.org/10.1289/EHP306

Developing and applying the adverse outcome pathway concept for understanding and predicting neurotoxicity.

The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) concept has recently been proposed to support a paradigm shift in regulatory toxicology testing and risk assessment. This concept is similar to the Mode of Action (MOA), in that it describes a sequence of measurable key events triggered by a molecular initiating event in which a stressor interacts with a biological target. The resulting cascade of key events includes molecular, cellular, structural and functional changes in biological systems, resulting in a measurable adverse outcome. Thereby, an AOP ideally provides information relevant to chemical structure-activity relationships as a basis for predicting effects of structurally similar compounds. AOPs could potentially also form the basis for qualitative and quantitative predictive modeling of the human adverse outcome resulting from molecular initiating or other key events for which higher-throughput testing methods are available or can be developed. A variety of cellular and molecular processes are known to be critical for normal function of the central (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems (PNS). Because of the biological and functional complexity of the CNS and PNS, it has been challenging to establish causative links and quantitative relationships between key events that comprise the pathways leading from chemical exposure to an adverse outcome in the nervous system. Following introduction of the principles of MOA and AOPs, examples of potential or putative adverse outcome pathways specific for developmental or adult neurotoxicity are summarized and aspects of their assessment considered. Their possible application in developing mechanistically informed Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) is also discussed

Developing and applying the adverse outcome pathway concept for understanding and predicting neurotoxicity

AbstractThe Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) concept has recently been proposed to support a paradigm shift in regulatory toxicology testing and risk assessment. This concept is similar to the Mode of Action (MOA), in that it describes a sequence of measurable key events triggered by a molecular initiating event in which a stressor interacts with a biological target. The resulting cascade of key events includes molecular, cellular, structural and functional changes in biological systems, resulting in a measurable adverse outcome. Thereby, an AOP ideally provides information relevant to chemical structure-activity relationships as a basis for predicting effects of structurally similar compounds. AOPs could potentially also form the basis for qualitative and quantitative predictive modeling of the human adverse outcome resulting from molecular initiating or other key events for which higher-throughput testing methods are available or can be developed.A variety of cellular and molecular processes are known to be critical for normal function of the central (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems (PNS). Because of the biological and functional complexity of the CNS and PNS, it has been challenging to establish causative links and quantitative relationships between key events that comprise the pathways leading from chemical exposure to an adverse outcome in the nervous system. Following introduction of the principles of MOA and AOPs, examples of potential or putative adverse outcome pathways specific for developmental or adult neurotoxicity are summarized and aspects of their assessment considered. Their possible application in developing mechanistically informed Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) is also discussed

Increasing Scientific Confidence in Adverse Outcome Pathways: Application of Tailored Bradford-Hill Considerations for Evaluating Weight of Evidence

Systematic consideration of scientific support is a critical element in developing and, ultimately, using adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) for various regulatory applications. Though weight of evidence (WoE) analysis has been proposed as a basis for assessment of the maturity and level of confidence in an AOP, methodologies and tools are still being formalized. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Users’ Handbook Supplement to the Guidance Document for Developing and Assessing AOPs (OECD, 2014a; hereafter referred to as the OECD AOP Handbook) provides tailored Bradford-Hill (BH) considerations for systematic assessment of confidence in a given AOP. These considerations include 1) biological plausibility and 2) empirical support (dose-response, temporality, and incidence) for key event relationships (KERs), and 3) essentiality of key events (KEs). Here, we test the application of these tailored BH considerations and the guidance outlined in the OECD AOP Handbook using a number of case examples to increase experience in more transparently documenting rationales for assigned levels of confidence to KEs and KERs, and to promote consistency in evaluation within and across AOPs. The major lessons learned from experience are documented, and taken together with the case examples, should contribute to better common understanding of the nature and form of documentation required to increase confidence in the application of AOPs for specific uses. Based on the tailored BH considerations and defining questions, a prototype quantitative model for assessing the WoE of an AOP using tools of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is described. The applicability of the approach is also demonstrated using the case example aromatase inhibition leading to reproductive dysfunction in fish. Following the acquisition of additional experience in the development and assessment of AOPs, further refinement of parameterization of the model through expert elicitation is recommended. Overall, the application of quantitative WoE approaches hold promise to enhance the rigor, transparency and reproducibility for AOP WoE determinations and may play an important role in delineating areas where research would have the greatest impact on improving the overall confidence in the AOP.JRC.F.3-Chemicals Safety and Alternative Method

Development of Good Modelling Practice for Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Models for Use in Risk Assessment: The First Steps

The increasing use of tissue dosimetry estimated using pharmacokinetic models in chemical risk assessments in various jurisdictions necessitates the development of internationally recognized good modelling practice (GMP). These practices would facilitate sharing of models and model evaluations and consistent applications in risk assessments. Clear descriptions of good practices for (1) model development i.e., research and analysis activities, (2) model characterization i.e., methods to describe how consistent the model is with biology and the strengths and limitations of available models and data, such as sensitivity analyses, (3) model documentation, and (4) model evaluation i.e., independent review that will assist risk assessors in their decisions of whether and how to use the models, and also model developers to understand expectations for various purposes e.g., research versus application in risk assessment. Next steps in the development of guidance for GMP and research to improve the scientific basis of the models are described based on a review of the current status of the application of physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models in risk assessments in Europe, Canada, and the United States at the International Workshop on the Development of GMP for PBPK Models in Greece on April 27-29, 2007.JRC.I.2-In-vitro Toxicolog