The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is faced with the challenge of efficiently and credibly evaluating chemical safety often with limited or no available toxicity data. The expanding number of chemicals found in commerce and the environment, coupled with time and resource requirements for traditional toxicity testing and exposure characterization, continue to underscore the need for new approaches. In 2005, EPA charted a new course to address this challenge by embracing computational toxicology (CompTox) and investing in the technologies and capabilities to push the field forward. The return on this investment has been demonstrated through results and applications across a range of human and environmental health problems, as well as initial application to regulatory decision-making within programs such as the EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. The CompTox initiative at EPA is more than a decade old. This manuscript presents a blueprint to guide the strategic and operational direction over the next 5 years. The primary goal is to obtain broader acceptance of the CompTox approaches for application to higher tier regulatory decisions, such as chemical assessments. To achieve this goal, the blueprint expands and refines the use of high-throughput and computational modeling approaches to transform the components in chemical risk assessment, while systematically addressing key challenges that have hindered progress. In addition, the blueprint outlines additional investments in cross-cutting efforts to characterize uncertainty and variability, develop software and information technology tools, provide outreach and training, and establish scientific confidence for application to different public health and environmental regulatory decisions.
Use of high-throughput, in vitro bioactivity data in setting a point-of-departure (POD) has the potential to accelerate the pace of human health safety evaluation by informing screening-level assessments. The primary objective of this work was to compare PODs based on high-throughput predictions of bioactivity, exposure predictions, and traditional hazard information for 448 chemicals. PODs derived from new approach methodologies (NAMs) were obtained for this comparison using the 50th (PODNAM, 50) and the 95th (PODNAM, 95) percentile credible interval estimates for the steady-state plasma concentration used in in vitro to in vivo extrapolation of administered equivalent doses. Of the 448 substances, 89% had a PODNAM, 95 that was less than the traditional POD (PODtraditional) value. For the 48 substances for which PODtraditional < PODNAM, 95, the PODNAM and PODtraditional were typically within a factor of 10 of each other, and there was an enrichment of chemical structural features associated with organophosphate and carbamate insecticides. When PODtraditional < PODNAM, 95, it did not appear to result from an enrichment of PODtraditional based on a particular study type (eg, developmental, reproductive, and chronic studies). Bioactivity:exposure ratios, useful for identification of substances with potential priority, demonstrated that high-throughput exposure predictions were greater than the PODNAM, 95 for 11 substances. When compared with threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) values, the PODNAM, 95 was greater than the corresponding TTC value 90% of the time. This work demonstrates the feasibility, and continuing challenges, of using in vitro bioactivity as a protective estimate of POD in screening-level assessments via a case study.
Changes in chemical regulations worldwide have increased the demand for new data on chemical safety. New approach methodologies (NAMs) are defined broadly here as including in silico approaches and in chemico and in vitro assays, as well as the inclusion of information from the exposure of chemicals in the context of hazard [European Chemicals Agency, " New Approach Methodologies in Regulatory Science ", 2016]. NAMs for toxicity testing, including alternatives to animal testing approaches, have shown promise to provide a large amount of data to fill information gaps in both hazard and exposure. In order to increase experience with the new data and to advance the applications of NAM data to evaluate the safety of data-poor chemicals, demonstration case studies have to be developed to build confidence in their usability. Case studies can be used to explore the domains of applicability of the NAM data and identify areas that would benefit from further research, development, and application. To ensure that this science evolves with direct input from and engagement by risk managers and regulatory decision makers, a workshop was convened among senior leaders from international regulatory agencies to identify common barriers for using NAMs and to propose next steps to address them. Central to the workshop were a series of collaborative case studies designed to explore areas where the benefits of NAM data could be demonstrated. These included use of in vitro bioassays data in combination with exposure estimates to derive a quantitative assessment of risk, use of NAMs for updating chemical categorizations, and use of NAMs to increase understanding of exposure and human health toxicity of various chemicals. The case study approach proved effective in building collaborations and engagement with regulatory decision makers and to promote the importance of data and knowledge sharing among international regulatory agencies. The case studies will be continued to explore new ways of describing hazard (i.e., pathway perturbations as a measure of adversity) and new ways of describing risk (i.e., using NAMs to identify protective levels without necessarily being predictive of a specific hazard). Importantly, the case studies also highlighted the need for increased training and communication across the various communities including the risk assessors, regulators, stakeholders (e.g., industry, non-governmental organizations), and the general public. The development and application of NAMs will play an increasing role in filling important data gaps on the safety of chemicals, but confidence in NAMs will only come with learning by doing and sharing in the experience.
There has been a conceptual shift in toxicological studies from describing what happens to explaining how the adverse outcome occurs, thereby enabling a deeper and improved understanding of how biomolecular and mechanistic profiling can inform hazard identification and improve risk assessment. Compared to traditional toxicology methods, which have a heavy reliance on animals, new approaches to generate toxicological data are becoming available for the safety assessment of chemicals, including high-throughput and high-content screening (HTS, HCS). With the emergence of nanotechnology, the exponential increase in the total number of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) in research, development, and commercialization requires a robust scientific approach to screen ENM safety in humans and the environment rapidly and efficiently. Spurred by the developments in chemical testing, a promising new toxicological paradigm for ENMs is to use alternative test strategies (ATS), which reduce reliance on animal testing through the use of in vitro and in silico methods such as HTS, HCS, and computational modeling. Furthermore, this allows for the comparative analysis of large numbers of ENMs simultaneously and for hazard assessment at various stages of the product development process and overall life cycle. Using carbon nanotubes as a case study, a workshop bringing together national and international leaders from government, industry, and academia was convened at the University of California, Los Angeles to discuss the utility of ATS for decision-making analyses of ENMs. After lively discussions, a short list of generally shared viewpoints on this topic was generated, including a general view that ATS approaches for ENMs can significantly benefit chemical safety analysis.
The science of exposure assessment is relatively new and evolving rapidly with the advancement of sophisticated methods for specific measurements at the picogram per gram level or lower in a variety of environmental and biologic matrices. Without this measurement capability, environmental health studies rely on questionnaires or other indirect means as the primary method to assess individual exposures. Although we use indirect methods, they are seldom used as stand-alone tools. Analyses of environmental and biologic samples have allowed us to get more precise data on exposure pathways, from sources to concentrations, to routes, to exposure, to doses. They also often allow a better estimation of the absorbed dose and its relation to potential adverse health outcomes in individuals and in populations. Here, we make note of various environmental agents and how best to assess exposure to them in the National Children’s Study—a longitudinal epidemiologic study of children’s health. Criteria for the analytical method of choice are discussed with particular emphasis on the need for long-term quality control and quality assurance measures.
This document is a compilation (a secondary reference GLOSSARY OF EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT-RELATED TERMS: A COMPILATION PreambleThis is an unedited selection of exposure assessment related terms taken from a combination of 57 glossaries for exposure and related fields (references below). It has been prepared for the IPCS Exposure Terminology Subcommittee as a research paper for discussion purposes. It makes no pretense at being comprehensive; the 57 glossaries were those that were available to the Subcommittee when the project was in progress. Efforts to obtain several other glossaries were unsuccessful in the period when the work was being done. This compilation is being made available on the IPCS Harmonization website to aid researchers in finding differences in definitions for exposure-related terms, which is part of the original intent of the Exposure Terminology Subcommittee.Selections of terms in this glossary were based on the IPCS Exposure Terminology Subcommittee's opinion of relevance to exposure assessment. Toxicological terms, risk-related terms, chemical names, procedural terms, and risk management terms were generally excluded from this list, as were terms clearly outside the risk assessment paradigm altogether.The definitions are presented as they were worded in the references, with minor adjustments to reflect agreement among several definitions as to singular vs. plural definitions (e.g., source vs. sources).The order in which the definitions are presented is alphabetical by reference, and should not imply order of importance or "correctness." Where several references give the same definition, the references are listed in order of dates, with oldest first.
This review presents a brief overview of the health effects and exposures of two criteria pollutants-ozone and particulate matter-and two toxic air pollutants-benzene and formaldehyde. These pollutants were selected from the six criteria pollutants and from the 189 toxic air pollutants on the basis of their prevalence in the United States, their physicochemical behavior, and the magnitude of their potential health threat. The health effects data included in this review primarily include results from epidemiologic studies; however, some findings from animal studies are also discussed when no other information is available. Health effects findings for each pollutant are related in this review to corresponding information about outdoor, indoor, and personal exposures and pollutant sources.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.