Category formation, grouping and read across methods are broadly applicable in toxicological assessments and may be used to fill data gaps for chemical safety assessment and regulatory decisions. In order to facilitate a transparent and systematic approach to aid regulatory acceptance, a strategy to evaluate chemical category membership, to support the use of read-across predictions that may be used to fill data gaps for regulatory decisions is proposed. There are two major aspects of any read-across exercise, namely assessing similarity and uncertainty. While there can be an over-arching rationale for grouping organic substances based on molecular structure and chemical properties, these similarities alone are generally not sufficient to justify a read-across prediction. Further scientific justification is normally required to justify the chemical grouping, typically including considerations of bioavailability, metabolism and biological/mechanistic plausibility. Sources of uncertainty include a variety of elements which are typically divided into two main issues: the uncertainty associated firstly with the similarity justification and secondly the completeness of the read-across argument. This article focuses on chronic toxicity, whilst acknowledging the approaches are applicable to all endpoints. Templates, developed from work to prepare for the application of new toxicological data to read-across assessment, are presented. These templates act as proposals to assist in assessing similarity in the context of chemistry, toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics as well as to guide the systematic characterisation of uncertainty both in the context of the similarity rationale, the read across data and overall approach and conclusion. Lastly, a workflow for reporting a read-across prediction is suggested.

This paper reviews regulatory requirements and recent case studies to illustrate how the risk assessment (RA) of chemical mixtures is conducted, considering both the effects on human health and on the environment. A broad range of chemicals, regulations and RA methodologies are covered, in order to identify mixtures of concern, gaps in the regulatory framework, data needs, and further work to be carried out. Also the current and potential future use of novel tools (Adverse Outcome Pathways, in silico tools, toxicokinetic modelling, etc.) in the RA of combined effects were reviewed. The assumptions made in the RA, predictive model specifications and the choice of toxic reference values can greatly influence the assessment outcome, and should therefore be specifically justified. Novel tools could support mixture RA mainly by providing a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms of combined effects. Nevertheless, their use is currently limited because of a lack of guidance, data, and expertise. More guidance is needed to facilitate their application. As far as the authors are aware, no prospective RA concerning chemicals related to various regulatory sectors has been performed to date, even though numerous chemicals are registered under several regulatory frameworks.

The Technical Committee of Classification and Labelling dealing with harmonized classification of substances and classification criteria under Directive 67/548/EEC on behalf of the European Commission nominated an expert group on skin sensitization in order to investigate further the possibility for potency consideration of skin sensitizers for future development of the classification criteria. All substances and preparations should be classified on the basis of their intrinsic properties and should be labelled accordingly with the rules set up in the Directive 67/548/EEC. The classification should be the same under their full life cycle and in the case that there is no harmonized classification the substance or preparation should be self-classified by the manufacturer in accordance with the same criteria. The Directive does not apply to certain preparations in the finished state, such as medical products, cosmetics, food and feeding stuffs, which are subject to specific community legislation. The main questions that are answered in this report are whether it would be possible to give detailed guidance on how to grade allergen potency based on the existing methods, whether such grading could be translated into practical thresholds and whether these could be set for both induction and elicitation. Examples are given for substances falling into various potency groups for skin sensitization relating to results from the local lymph node assay, the guinea pig maximization test, the Buehler method and human experience.

BackgroundSafety assessment for repeated dose toxicity is one of the largest challenges in the process to replace animal testing. This is also one of the proof of concept ambitions of SEURAT-1, the largest ever European Union research initiative on alternative testing, co-funded by the European Commission and Cosmetics Europe. This review is based on the discussion and outcome of a workshop organized on initiative of the SEURAT-1 consortium joined by a group of international experts with complementary knowledge to further develop traditional read-across and include new approach data.ObjectivesThe aim of the suggested strategy for chemical read-across is to show how a traditional read-across based on structural similarities between source and target substance can be strengthened with additional evidence from new approach data—for example, information from in vitro molecular screening, “-omics” assays and computational models—to reach regulatory acceptance.MethodsWe identified four read-across scenarios that cover typical human health assessment situations. For each such decision context, we suggested several chemical groups as examples to prove when read-across between group members is possible, considering both chemical and biological similarities.ConclusionsWe agreed to carry out the complete read-across exercise for at least one chemical category per read-across scenario in the context of SEURAT-1, and the results of this exercise will be completed and presented by the end of the research initiative in December 2015.CitationBerggren E, Amcoff P, Benigni R, Blackburn K, Carney E, Cronin M, Deluyker H, Gautier F, Judson RS, Kass GE, Keller D, Knight D, Lilienblum W, Mahony C, Rusyn I, Schultz T, Schwarz M, Schüürmann G, White A, Burton J, Lostia AM, Munn S, Worth A. 2015. Chemical safety assessment using read-across: assessing the use of novel testing methods to strengthen the evidence base for decision making. Environ Health Perspect 123:1232–1240; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409342

HighlightsA workflow for an exposure driven chemical safety assessment to avoid animal testing.Hypothesis based on existing data, in silico modelling and biokinetic considerations.A tool to inform targeted and toxicologically relevant in vitro testing.