Weight of evidence evaluation for chemical-induced immunotoxicity for PFOA and PFOS: findings from an independent panel of experts.

Immunotoxicity is the critical endpoint used by some regulatory agencies to establish toxicity values for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). However, the hypothesis that exposure to certain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) causes immune dysregulation is subject to much debate. An independent, international expert panel was engaged utilizing methods to reduce bias and "groupthink". The panel concluded there is moderate evidence that PFOS and PFOA are immunotoxic, based primarily on evidence from animal data. However, species concordance and human relevance cannot be well established due to data limitations. The panel recommended additional testing that includes longer-term exposures, evaluates both genders, includes other species of animals, tests lower dose levels, assesses more complete measures of immune responses, and elucidates the mechanism of action. Panel members agreed that the Faroe Islands cohort data should not be used as the primary basis for deriving PFAS risk assessment values. The panel agreed that vaccine antibody titer is not useful as a stand-alone metric for risk assessment. Instead, PFOA and PFOS toxicity values should rely on multiple high-quality studies, which are currently not available for immune suppression. The panel concluded that the available PFAS immune epidemiology studies suffer from weaknesses in study design that preclude their use, whereas available animal toxicity studies provide comprehensive dataset to derive points of departure (PODs) for non-immune endpoints. The panel recommends accounting for potential PFAS immunotoxicity by applying a database uncertainty factor to POD values derived from animal studies for other more robustly supported critical effects.

A new approach to the classification of carcinogenicity.

Concern over substances that may cause cancer has led to various classification schemes to recognize carcinogenic threats and provide a basis to manage those threats. The least useful schemes have a binary choice that declares a substance carcinogenic or not. This overly simplistic approach ignores the complexity of cancer causation by considering neither how the substance causes cancer, nor the potency of that mode of action. Consequently, substances are classified simply as "carcinogenic", compromising the opportunity to properly manage these kinds of substances. It will likely be very difficult, if not impossible, to incorporate New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) into binary schemes. In this paper we propose a new approach cancer classification scheme that segregates substances by both mode of action and potency into three categories and, as a consequence, provides useful guidance in the regulation and management of substances with carcinogenic potential. Examples are given, including aflatoxin (category A), trichlorethylene (category B), and titanium dioxide (category C), which demonstrate the clear differentiation among these substances that generate appropriate levels of concern and management options.

The codification of hazard and its impact on the hazard versus risk controversy.

The long running controversy about the relative merits of hazard-based versus risk-based approaches has been investigated. There are three levels of hazard codification: level 1 divides chemicals into dichotomous bands of hazardous and non-hazardous; level 2 divides chemicals into bands of hazard based on severity and/or potency; and level 3 places each chemical on a continuum of hazard based on severity and/or potency. Any system which imposes compartments onto a continuum will give rise to issues at the boundaries, especially with only two compartments. Level 1 schemes are only justifiable if there is no variation in severity, or potency or if there is no threshold. This is the assumption implicit in GHS/EU classification for carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity and mutagenicity. However, this assumption has been challenged. Codification level 2 hazard assessments offer a range of choices and reduce the built-in conflict inherent in the level 1 process. Level 3 assessments allow a full range of choices between the extremes and reduce the built-in conflict even more. The underlying reason for the controversy between hazard and risk is the use of level 1 hazard codification schemes in situations where there are ranges of severity and potency which require the use of level 2 or level 3 hazard codification. There is not a major difference between level 2 and level 3 codification, and they can both be used to select appropriate risk management options. Existing level 1 codification schemes should be reviewed and developed into level 2 schemes where appropriate.

Chemical carcinogenicity revisited 2: Current knowledge of carcinogenesis shows that categorization as a carcinogen or non-carcinogen is not scientifically credible.

Developments in the understanding of the etiology of cancer have undermined the 1970s concept that chemicals are either "carcinogens" or "non-carcinogens". The capacity to induce cancer should not be classified in an inflexible binary manner as present (carcinogen) or absent (non-carcinogen). Chemicals may induce cancer by three categories of mode of action: direct interaction with DNA or DNA replication including DNA repair and epigenetics; receptor-mediated induction of cell division; and non-specific induction of cell division. The long-term rodent bioassay is neither appropriate nor efficient to evaluate carcinogenic potential for humans and to inform risk management decisions. It is of questionable predicitiveness, expensive, time consuming, and uses hundreds of animals. Although it has been embedded in practice for over 50 years, it has only been used to evaluate less than 5% of chemicals that are in use. Furthermore, it is not reproducible because of the probabilisitic nature of the process it is evaluating combined with dose limiting toxicity, dose selection, and study design. The modes of action that lead to the induction of tumors are already considered under other hazardous property categories in classification (Mutagenicity/Genotoxicity and Target Organ Toxicity); a separate category for Carcinogenicity is not required and provides no additional public health protection.

Chemical carcinogenicity revisited 1: A unified theory of carcinogenicity based on contemporary knowledge.

Developments in the understanding of the etiology of cancer have profound implications for the way the carcinogenicity of chemicals is addressed. This paper proposes a unified theory of carcinogenesis that will illuminate better ways to evaluate and regulate chemicals. In the last four decades, we have come to understand that for a cell and a group of cells to begin the process of unrestrained growth that is defined as cancer, there must be changes in DNA that reprogram the cell from normal to abnormal. Cancer is the consequence of DNA coding errors that arise either directly from mutagenic events or indirectly from cell proliferation especially if sustained. Chemicals that act via direct interaction with DNA can induce cancer because they cause mutations which can be carried forward in dividing cells. Chemicals that act via non-genotoxic mechanisms must be dosed to maintain a proliferative environment so that the steps toward neoplasia have time to occur. Chemicals that induce increased cellular proliferation can be divided into two categories: those which act by a cellular receptor to induce cellular proliferation, and those which act via non-specific mechanisms such as cytotoxicity. This knowledge has implications for testing chemicals for carcinogenic potential and risk management.

Chemical carcinogenicity revisited 3: Risk assessment of carcinogenic potential based on the current state of knowledge of carcinogenesis in humans.

Over 50 years, we have learned a great deal about the biology that underpins cancer but our approach to testing chemicals for carcinogenic potential has not kept up. Only a small number of chemicals has been tested in animal-intensive, time consuming, and expensive long-term bioassays in rodents. We now recommend a transition from the bioassay to a decision-tree matrix that can be applied to a broader range of chemicals, with better predictivity, based on the premise that cancer is the consequence of DNA coding errors that arise either directly from mutagenic events or indirectly from sustained cell proliferation. The first step is in silico and in vitro assessment for mutagenic (DNA reactive) activity. If mutagenic, it is assumed to be carcinogenic unless evidence indicates otherwise. If the chemical does not show mutagenic potential, the next step is assessment of potential human exposure compared to the threshold for toxicological concern (TTC). If potential human exposure exceeds the TTC, then testing is done to look for effects associated with the key characteristics that are precursors to the carcinogenic process, such as increased cell proliferation, immunosuppression, or significant estrogenic activity. Protection of human health is achieved by limiting exposures to below NOEALs for these precursor effects. The decision tree matrix is animal-sparing, cost effective, and in step with our growing knowledge of the process of cancer formation.

Quantitative weight of evidence to assess confidence in potential modes of action.

The evolved World Health Organization/International Programme on Chemical Safety mode of action (MOA) framework provides a structure for evaluating evidence in pathways of causally linked key events (KE) leading to adverse health effects. Although employed globally, variability in use of the MOA framework has led to different interpretations of the sufficiency of evidence in support of hypothesized MOAs. A proof of concept extension of the MOA framework is proposed for scoring confidence in the supporting data to improve scientific justification for MOA use in characterizing hazards and selecting dose-response extrapolation methods for specific chemicals. This involves selecting hypothesized MOAs, and then, for each MOA, scoring the weight of evidence (WOE) in support of causality for each KE using evolved Bradford Hill causal considerations (biological plausibility, essentiality, dose-response concordance, consistency, and analogy). This early proof of concept method is demonstrated by comparing two potential MOAs (mutagenicity and peroxisome proliferator activated receptor-alpha) for clofibrate, a rodent liver carcinogen. Quantitative confidence scoring of hypothesized MOAs is shown to be useful in characterizing the likely operative MOA. To guide method refinement and future confidence scoring for a spectrum of MOAs, areas warranting further focus and lessons learned, including the need to incorporate a narrative discussion of the weights used in the evaluation and an overall evaluation of the plausibility of the outcome, are presented.

Classification schemes for carcinogenicity based on hazard-identification have become outmoded and serve neither science nor society.

Classification schemes for carcinogenicity based solely on hazard-identification such as the IARC monograph process and the UN system adopted in the EU have become outmoded. They are based on a concept developed in the 1970s that chemicals could be divided into two classes: carcinogens and non-carcinogens. Categorization in this way places into the same category chemicals and agents with widely differing potencies and modes of action. This is how eating processed meat can fall into the same category as sulfur mustard gas. Approaches based on hazard and risk characterization present an integrated and balanced picture of hazard, dose response and exposure and allow informed risk management decisions to be taken. Because a risk-based decision framework fully considers hazard in the context of dose, potency, and exposure the unintended downsides of a hazard only approach are avoided, e.g., health scares, unnecessary economic costs, loss of beneficial products, adoption of strategies with greater health costs, and the diversion of public funds into unnecessary research. An initiative to agree upon a standardized, internationally acceptable methodology for carcinogen assessment is needed now. The approach should incorporate principles and concepts of existing international consensus-based frameworks including the WHO IPCS mode of action framework.

Mode of action framework analysis for receptor-mediated toxicity: The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα) as a case study.

Several therapeutic agents and industrial chemicals induce liver tumors in rodents through the activation of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARα). The cellular and molecular events by which PPARα activators induce rodent hepatocarcinogenesis has been extensively studied and elucidated. This review summarizes the weight of evidence relevant to the hypothesized mode of action (MOA) for PPARα activator-induced rodent hepatocarcinogenesis and identifies gaps in our knowledge of this MOA. Chemical-specific and mechanistic data support concordance of temporal and dose-response relationships for the key events associated with many PPARα activators including a phthalate ester plasticizer di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and the drug gemfibrozil. While biologically plausible in humans, the hypothesized key events in the rodent MOA, for PPARα activators, are unlikely to induce liver tumors in humans because of toxicodynamic and biological differences in responses. This conclusion is based on minimal or no effects observed on growth pathways, hepatocellular proliferation and liver tumors in humans and/or species (including hamsters, guinea pigs and cynomolgous monkeys) that are more appropriate human surrogates than mice and rats at overlapping dose levels. Overall, the panel concluded that significant quantitative differences in PPARα activator-induced effects related to liver cancer formation exist between rodents and humans. On the basis of these quantitative differences, most of the workgroup felt that the rodent MOA is "not relevant to humans" with the remaining members concluding that the MOA is "unlikely to be relevant to humans". The two groups differed in their level of confidence based on perceived limitations of the quantitative and mechanistic knowledge of the species differences, which for some panel members strongly supports but cannot preclude the absence of effects under unlikely exposure scenarios.

Current and future needs for developmental toxicity testing.

A review is presented of the use of developmental toxicity testing in the United States and international regulatory assessment of human health risks associated with exposures to pharmaceuticals (human and veterinary), chemicals (agricultural, industrial, and environmental), food additives, cosmetics, and consumer products. Developmental toxicology data are used for prioritization and screening of pharmaceuticals and chemicals, for evaluating and labeling of pharmaceuticals, and for characterizing hazards and risk of exposures to industrial and environmental chemicals. The in vivo study designs utilized in hazard characterization and dose-response assessment for developmental outcomes have not changed substantially over the past 30 years and have served the process well. Now there are opportunities to incorporate new technologies and approaches to testing into the existing assessment paradigm, or to apply innovative approaches to various aspects of risk assessment. Developmental toxicology testing can be enhanced by the refinement or replacement of traditional in vivo protocols, including through the use of in vitro assays, studies conducted in alternative nonmammalian species, the application of new technologies, and the use of in silico models. Potential benefits to the current regulatory process include the ability to screen large numbers of chemicals quickly, with the commitment of fewer resources than traditional toxicology studies, and to refine the risk assessment process through an enhanced understanding of the mechanisms of developmental toxicity and their relevance to potential human risk. As the testing paradigm evolves, the ability to use developmental toxicology data to meet diverse critical regulatory needs must be retained.

Meeting the common needs of a more effective and efficient testing and assessment paradigm for chemical risk management.

Significant advances have been made in human health and ecological risk assessment over the last decade. Substantial challenges, however, remain in providing credible scientific information in a timely and efficient manner to support chemical risk assessment and management decisions. A major challenge confronting risk managers is the need for critical information to address risk uncertainties in large chemical inventories such as high- and medium-production-volume industrial chemicals or pesticide inert ingredients. From a strategic and tactical viewpoint, an integrated approach that relies on all existing knowledge and uses a range of methods, including those from emerging and novel technologies, is needed to advance progressive and focused testing strategies, as well as to advance the utility and predictability of the risk assessment by providing more relevant information. A hypothesis-based approach that draws on all relevant information is consistent with the vision articulated in the 2007 report by the National Research Council, Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy. This article describes the current practices in evaluating chemical risks and ongoing efforts to enhance the quality and efficiency of risk assessment and risk management decisions within the Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Perfluoroalkyl acids and related chemistries--toxicokinetics and modes of action.

The perfluoroalkyl acid salts (both carboxylates and sulfonates, hereafter designated as PFAAs) and their derivatives are important chemicals that have numerous consumer and industrial applications. However, recent discoveries that some of these compounds have global distribution, environmental persistence, presence in humans and wildlife, as well as toxicity in laboratory animal models, have generated considerable scientific, regulatory, and public interest on an international scale. The Society of Toxicology Contemporary Concepts in Toxicology Symposium, entitled "Perfluoroalkyl Acids and Related Chemistries: Toxicokinetics and Modes-of-Action Workshop" was held February 14-16, 2007 at the Westin Arlington Gateway, Arlington, VA. In addition to the Society of Toxicology, this symposium was sponsored by 3M Company, DuPont, Plastics Europe, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The objectives of this 3-day meeting were to (1) provide an overview of PFAA toxicity and description of recent findings with the sulfonates, carboxylates, and telomer alcohols; (2) address the toxicokinetic profiles of various PFAAs among animal models and humans, and the biological processes that are responsible for these observations; (3) examine the possible modes of action that determine the PFAA toxicities observed in animal models, and their relevance to human health risks; and (4) identify the critical research needs and strategies to fill the existing informational gaps that hamper risk assessment of these chemicals. This report summarizes the discourse that occurred during the symposium.

A critical review of the application of polymer of low concern and regulatory criteria to fluoropolymers.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of fluorinated substances that are in the focus of researchers and regulators due to widespread presence in the environment and biota, including humans, of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). Fluoropolymers, high molecular weight polymers, have unique properties that constitute a distinct class within the PFAS group. Fluoropolymers have thermal, chemical, photochemical, hydrolytic, oxidative, and biological stability. They have negligible residual monomer and oligomer content and low to no leachables. Fluoropolymers are practically insoluble in water and not subject to long-range transport. With a molecular weight well over 100 000 Da, fluoropolymers cannot cross the cell membrane. Fluoropolymers are not bioavailable or bioaccumulative, as evidenced by toxicology studies on polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE): acute and subchronic systemic toxicity, irritation, sensitization, local toxicity on implantation, cytotoxicity, in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity, hemolysis, complement activation, and thrombogenicity. Clinical studies of patients receiving permanently implanted PTFE cardiovascular medical devices demonstrate no chronic toxicity or carcinogenicity and no reproductive, developmental, or endocrine toxicity. This paper brings together fluoropolymer toxicity data, human clinical data, and physical, chemical, thermal, and biological data for review and assessment to show that fluoropolymers satisfy widely accepted assessment criteria to be considered as "polymers of low concern" (PLC). This review concludes that fluoropolymers are distinctly different from other polymeric and nonpolymeric PFAS and should be separated from them for hazard assessment or regulatory purposes. Grouping fluoropolymers with all classes of PFAS for "read across" or structure-activity relationship assessment is not scientifically appropriate. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:316-334. © 2018 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Reproductive and developmental toxicity of potassium perfluorohexanesulfonate in CD-1 mice.

Potassium perfluorohexanesulfonate (K+PFHxS) was evaluated for reproductive/developmental toxicity in CD-1 mice. Up to 3 mg/kg-d K+PFHxS was administered (n = 30/sex/group) before mating, for at least 42 days in F0 males, and for F0 females, through gestation and lactation. F1 pups were directly dosed with K+PFHxS for 14 days after weaning. There was an equivocal decrease in live litter size at 1 and 3 mg/kg-d, but the pup-born-to-implant ratio was unaffected. Adaptive hepatocellular hypertrophy was observed, and in 3 mg/kg-d F0 males, it was accompanied by concomitant decreased serum cholesterol and increased alkaline phosphatase. There were no other toxicologically significant findings on reproductive parameters, hematology/clinical pathology/TSH, neurobehavioral effects, or histopathology. There were no treatment-related effects on postnatal survival, development, or onset of preputial separation or vaginal opening in F1 mice. Consistent with previous studies, our data suggest that the potency of PFHxS is much lower than PFOS in rodents.

Perfluoroalkyl acids: a review of monitoring and toxicological findings.

In recent years, human and wildlife monitoring studies have identified perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAA) worldwide. This has led to efforts to better understand the hazards that may be inherent in these compounds, as well as the global distribution of the PFAAs. Much attention has focused on understanding the toxicology of the two most widely known PFAAs, perfluorooctanoic acid, and perfluorooctane sulfate. More recently, research was extended to other PFAAs. There has been substantial progress in understanding additional aspects of the toxicology of these compounds, particularly related to the developmental toxicity, immunotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, and the potential modes of action. This review provides an overview of the recent advances in the toxicology and mode of action for PFAAs, and of the monitoring data now available for the environment, wildlife, and humans. Several avenues of research are proposed that would further our understanding of this class of compounds.

Framework for use of toxicity screening tools in context-based decision-making.

One of the principal applications of toxicology data is to inform risk assessments and support risk management decisions that are protective of human health. Ideally, a risk assessor would have available all of the relevant information on (a) the toxicity profile of the agent of interest; (b) its interactions with living systems; and (c) the known or projected exposure scenarios: to whom, how much, by which route(s), and how often. In practice, however, complete information is seldom available. Nonetheless, decisions still must be made. Screening-level assays and tools can provide support for many aspects of the risk assessment process, as long as the limitations of the tools are understood and to the extent that the added uncertainty the tools introduce into the process can be characterized and managed. Use of these tools for decision-making may be an end in itself for risk assessment and decision-making or a preliminary step to more extensive data collection and evaluation before assessments are undertaken or completed and risk management decisions made. This paper describes a framework for the application of screening tools for human health decision-making, although with some modest modification, it could be made applicable to environmental settings as well. The framework consists of problem formulation, development of a screening strategy based on an assessment of critical data needs, and a data analysis phase that employs weight-of-evidence criteria and uncertainty analyses, and leads to context-based decisions. Criteria for determining the appropriate screening tool(s) have been identified. The choice and use of the tool(s) will depend on the question and the level of uncertainty that may be appropriate for the context in which the decision is being made. The framework is iterative, in that users may refine the question(s) as they proceed. Several case studies illustrate how the framework may be used effectively to address specific questions for any endpoint of toxicity.

Neurobehavioral assessment: a survey of use and value in safety assessment studies.

This report describes the results of a survey designed to evaluate the contribution of F1 neurobehavioral testing to hazard identification and characterization in safety assessment studies. (To review the details of the distributed survey, please see the supplementary data for this article on the journal's Web site.) The survey provided information about studies completed in industrial laboratories in the United States, Europe, and Japan since 1990 on 174 compounds. The types of compounds included were pharmaceutical (81%), agricultural (7%), industrial (1%), or were undefined (10%). Information collected included the intended use of the test agent, general study design and methodology, the types and characteristics of F1 behavioral evaluations, and the frequency with which agents affected neurobehavioral parameters in comparison to other F0 and F1 generation parameters. F1 general toxicology parameters such as mortality, pre- and postweaning body weight, and food intake were assessed in most studies and were affected more frequently than other parameters by the test agents. F1 behavioral parameters were assessed less consistently across studies, and were less frequently affected by the agents tested. Although affected by agents less often than general toxicology parameters, F1 behavioral parameters along with other parameters defined the no-observed-effect level (NOEL) in 17/113 (15%) of studies and solely defined the NOEL in 3/113 (2.6%) of studies. Thus, F1 behavioral parameters sometimes improved on the standard toxicological measures of hazard identification. While not detecting agent effects as readily as some measures, the F1 behavioral parameters provide information about agent effects on specialized functions of developing offspring not provided by other standard measures of toxicity. The survey results emphasize the need for further research into the methods of behavioral assessment as well as the mechanisms underlying the neurobehavioral alterations.

Evaluating the human relevance of chemically induced animal tumors.

Defining the mode(s) of action by which chemicals induce tumors in laboratory animals has become a key to judgments about the relevance of such tumor data for human risk assessment. Frameworks for analyzing mode of action information appear in recent U.S. EPA and IPCS publications relating to cancer risk assessment. This FORUM paper emphasizes that mode of action analytical frameworks depend on both qualitative and quantitative evaluations of relevant data and information: (1) presenting key events in the animal mode of action, (2) developing a "concordance" table for side-by-side comparison of key events as defined in animal studies with comparable information from human systems, and (3) using data and information from mode of action analyses, as well as information on relative sensitivity and exposure, to make weight-of-evidence judgments about the relevance of animal tumors for human cancer assessments. The paper features a systematic analysis for using mode of action information from animal and human studies, based in part on case examples involving environmental chemicals and pharmaceuticals.