Mechanism of Action of TiO2: Recommendations to Reduce Uncertainties Related to Carcinogenic Potential.

The Risk Assessment Committee of the European Chemicals Agency issued an opinion on classifying titanium dioxide (TiO2) as a suspected human carcinogen upon inhalation. Recent animal studies indicate that TiO2 may be carcinogenic through the oral route. There is considerable uncertainty on the carcinogenicity of TiO2, which may be decreased if its mechanism of action becomes clearer. Here we consider adverse outcome pathways and present the available information on each of the key events (KEs). Inhalation exposure to TiO2 can induce lung tumors in rats via a mechanism that is also applicable to other poorly soluble, low-toxicity particles. To reduce uncertainties regarding human relevance, we recommend gathering information on earlier KEs such as oxidative stress in humans. For oral exposure, insufficient information is available to conclude whether TiO2 can induce intestinal tumors. An oral carcinogenicity study with well-characterized (food-grade) TiO2 is needed, including an assessment of toxicokinetics and early KEs.

Physico-chemical properties of manufactured nanomaterials - Characterisation and relevant methods. An outlook based on the OECD Testing Programme.

Identifying and characterising nanomaterials require additional information on physico-chemical properties and test methods, compared to chemicals in general. Furthermore, regulatory decisions for chemicals are usually based upon certain toxicological properties, and these effects may not be equivalent to those for nanomaterials. However, regulatory agencies lack an authoritative decision framework for nanomaterials that links the relevance of certain physico-chemical endpoints to toxicological effects. This paper investigates various physico-chemical endpoints and available test methods that could be used to produce such a decision framework for nanomaterials. It presents an overview of regulatory relevance and methods used for testing fifteen proposed physico-chemical properties of eleven nanomaterials in the OECD Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials' Testing Programme, complemented with methods from literature, and assesses the methods' adequacy and applications limits. Most endpoints are of regulatory relevance, though the specific parameters depend on the nanomaterial and type of assessment. Size (distribution) is the common characteristic of all nanomaterials and is decisive information for classifying a material as a nanomaterial. Shape is an important particle descriptor. The octanol-water partitioning coefficient is undefined for particulate nanomaterials. Methods, including sample preparation, need to be further standardised, and some new methods are needed. The current work of OECD's Test Guidelines Programme regarding physico-chemical properties is highlighted.

Towards a nanospecific approach for risk assessment.

In the current paper, a new strategy for risk assessment of nanomaterials is described, which builds upon previous project outcomes and is developed within the FP7 NANoREG project. NANoREG has the aim to develop, for the long term, new testing strategies adapted to a high number of nanomaterials where many factors can affect their environmental and health impact. In the proposed risk assessment strategy, approaches for (Quantitative) Structure Activity Relationships ((Q)SARs), grouping and read-across are integrated and expanded to guide the user how to prioritise those nanomaterial applications that may lead to high risks for human health. Furthermore, those aspects of exposure, kinetics and hazard assessment that are most likely to be influenced by the nanospecific properties of the material under assessment are identified. These aspects are summarised in six elements, which play a key role in the strategy: exposure potential, dissolution, nanomaterial transformation, accumulation, genotoxicity and immunotoxicity. With the current approach it is possible to identify those situations where the use of nanospecific grouping, read-across and (Q)SAR tools is likely to become feasible in the future, and to point towards the generation of the type of data that is needed for scientific justification, which may lead to regulatory acceptance of nanospecific applications of these tools.

Roadmap towards safe and sustainable advanced and innovative materials. (Outlook for 2024-2030).

The adoption of innovative advanced materials holds vast potential, contingent upon addressing safety and sustainability concerns. The European Commission advocates the integration of Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) principles early in the innovation process to streamline market introduction and mitigate costs. Within this framework, encompassing ecological, social, and economic factors is paramount. The NanoSafety Cluster (NSC) delineates key safety and sustainability areas, pinpointing unresolved issues and research gaps to steer the development of safe(r) materials. Leveraging FAIR data management and integration, alongside the alignment of regulatory aspects, fosters informed decision-making and innovation. Integrating circularity and sustainability mandates clear guidance, ensuring responsible innovation at every stage. Collaboration among stakeholders, anticipation of regulatory demands, and a commitment to sustainability are pivotal for translating SSbD into tangible advancements. Harmonizing standards and test guidelines, along with regulatory preparedness through an exchange platform, is imperative for governance and market readiness. By adhering to these principles, the effective and sustainable deployment of innovative materials can be realized, propelling positive transformation and societal acceptance.

Governance of advanced materials: Shaping a safe and sustainable future.

The past few decades of managing the uncertain risks associated with nanomaterials have provided valuable insights (knowledge gaps, tools, methods, etc.) that are equally important to promote safe and sustainable development and use of advanced materials. Based on these insights, the current paper proposes several actions to optimize the risk and sustainability governance of advanced materials. We emphasise the importance of establishing a European approach for risk and sustainability governance of advanced materials as soon as possible to keep up with the pace of innovation and to manage uncertainty among regulators, industry, SMEs and the public, regarding potential risks and impacts of advanced materials. Coordination of safe and sustainable advanced material research efforts, and data management according to the Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR) principles will enhance the generation of regulatory-relevant knowledge. This knowledge is crucial to identify whether current regulatory standardised and harmonised test methods are adequate to assess advanced materials. At the same time, there is urgent need for responsible innovation beyond regulatory compliance which can be promoted through the Safe and Sustainable Innovation Approach. that combines the Safe and Sustainable by Design concept with Regulatory Preparedness, supported by a trusted environment. We further recommend consolidating all efforts and networks related to the risk and sustainability governance of advanced materials in a single, easy-to-use digital portal. Given the anticipated complexity and tremendous efforts required, we identified the need of establishing an organisational structure dedicated to aligning the fast technological developments in advanced materials with proper risk and sustainability governance. Involvement of multiple stakeholders in a trusted environment ensures a coordinated effort towards the safe and sustainable development, production, and use of advanced materials. The existing infrastructures and network of experts involved in the governance of nanomaterials would form a solid foundation for such an organisational structure.

Considerations on the EU definition of a nanomaterial: science to support policy making.

In recent years, an increasing number of applications and products containing or using nanomaterials have become available. This has raised concerns that some of these materials may introduce new risks for humans or the environment. A clear definition to discriminate nanomaterials from other materials is prerequisite to include provisions for nanomaterials in legislation. In October 2011 the European Commission published the 'Recommendation on the definition of a nanomaterial', primarily intended to provide unambiguous criteria to identify materials for which special regulatory provisions might apply, but also to promote consistency on the interpretation of the term 'nanomaterial'. In this paper, the current status of various regulatory frameworks of the European Union with regard to nanomaterials is described, and major issues relevant for regulation of nanomaterials are discussed. This will contribute to better understanding the implications of the choices policy makers have to make in further regulation of nanomaterials. Potential issues that need to be addressed and areas of research in which science can contribute are indicated. These issues include awareness on situations in which nano-related risks may occur for materials that fall outside the definition, guidance and further development of measurement techniques, and dealing with changes during the life cycle.

Grouping and Read-Across Approaches for Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials.

Physicochemical properties of chemicals affect their exposure, toxicokinetics/fate and hazard, and for nanomaterials, the variation of these properties results in a wide variety of materials with potentially different risks. To limit the amount of testing for risk assessment, the information gathering process for nanomaterials needs to be efficient. At the same time, sufficient information to assess the safety of human health and the environment should be available for each nanomaterial. Grouping and read-across approaches can be utilised to meet these goals. This article presents different possible applications of grouping and read-across for nanomaterials within the broader perspective of the MARINA Risk Assessment Strategy (RAS), as developed in the EU FP7 project MARINA. Firstly, nanomaterials can be grouped based on limited variation in physicochemical properties to subsequently design an efficient testing strategy that covers the entire group. Secondly, knowledge about exposure, toxicokinetics/fate or hazard, for example via properties such as dissolution rate, aspect ratio, chemical (non-)activity, can be used to organise similar materials in generic groups to frame issues that need further attention, or potentially to read-across. Thirdly, when data related to specific endpoints is required, read-across can be considered, using data from a source material for the target nanomaterial. Read-across could be based on a scientifically sound justification that exposure, distribution to the target (fate/toxicokinetics) and hazard of the target material are similar to, or less than, the source material. These grouping and read-across approaches pave the way for better use of available information on nanomaterials and are flexible enough to allow future adaptations related to scientific developments.

A proposal for evaluation of exposure data.

There is a growing need for transparency concerning ways in which existing exposure data are weighted for their relative value and quality. Currently, this evaluation is largely subjective and is dependent on the quality of the judgement of the individual assessor or expert group. In this paper some general guidelines are presented for a quality assessment procedure. Such a predetermined procedure potentially enhances the consistency among different assessors and assessments and facilitates harmonization of assessment procedures. The guidelines are presented in the context of a decision tree with four decision rules for data quality, i.e. 'availability of occupational hygiene information', 'variability and precision issues', 'internal validity' and 'external validity'. These methodological issues are considered to be the most important aspects of data quality and will be discussed in this paper. The decision tree eventually results in three quality classes, i.e. exposure data providing sufficient information, supplementary information and data which should be excluded from the exposure assessment process. The guidelines should not be used in a rigid manner but have to be interpreted in the light of the particular circumstances and purposes of the assessment.