Update of the risk assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in food.

The European Commission asked EFSA to update its 2011 risk assessment on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in food, focusing on 10 congeners: BDE-28, -47, -49, -99, -100, -138, -153, -154, -183 and ­209. The CONTAM Panel concluded that the neurodevelopmental effects on behaviour and reproductive/developmental effects are the critical effects in rodent studies. For four congeners (BDE-47, -99, -153, -209) the Panel derived Reference Points, i.e. benchmark doses and corresponding lower 95% confidence limits (BMDLs), for endpoint-specific benchmark responses. Since repeated exposure to PBDEs results in accumulation of these chemicals in the body, the Panel estimated the body burden at the BMDL in rodents, and the chronic intake that would lead to the same body burden in humans. For the remaining six congeners no studies were available to identify Reference Points. The Panel concluded that there is scientific basis for inclusion of all 10 congeners in a common assessment group and performed a combined risk assessment. The Panel concluded that the combined margin of exposure (MOET) approach was the most appropriate risk metric and applied a tiered approach to the risk characterisation. Over 84,000 analytical results for the 10 congeners in food were used to estimate the exposure across dietary surveys and age groups of the European population. The most important contributors to the chronic dietary Lower Bound exposure to PBDEs were meat and meat products and fish and seafood. Taking into account the uncertainties affecting the assessment, the Panel concluded that it is likely that current dietary exposure to PBDEs in the European population raises a health concern.

Retrospective cumulative dietary risk assessment of craniofacial alterations by residues of pesticides.

EFSA established cumulative assessment groups and conducted retrospective cumulative risk assessments for two types of craniofacial alterations (alterations due to abnormal skeletal development, head soft tissue alterations and brain neural tube defects) for 14 European populations of women in childbearing age. Cumulative acute exposure calculations were performed by probabilistic modelling using monitoring data collected by Member States in 2017, 2018 and 2019. A rigorous uncertainty analysis was performed using expert knowledge elicitation. Considering all sources of uncertainty, their dependencies and differences between populations, it was concluded with varying degrees of certainty that the MOET resulting from cumulative exposure is above 100 for the two types of craniofacial alterations. The threshold for regulatory consideration established by risk managers is therefore not exceeded. Considering the severity of the effects under consideration, it was also assessed whether the MOET is above 500. This was the case with varying levels of certainty for the head soft tissue alterations and brain neural tube defects. However, for the alterations due to abnormal skeletal development, it was found about as likely as not that the MOET is above 500 in most populations. For two populations, it was even found more likely that the MOET is below 500. These results were discussed in the light of the conservatism of the methodological approach.

Cumulative dietary risk assessment of chronic acetylcholinesterase inhibition by residues of pesticides.

A retrospective cumulative risk assessment of dietary exposure to pesticide residues was conducted for chronic inhibition of acetylcholinesterase. The pesticides considered in this assessment were identified and characterised in a previous scientific report on the establishment of cumulative assessment groups of pesticides for their effects on the nervous system. The exposure assessments used monitoring data collected by Member States under their official pesticide monitoring programmes in 2016, 2017 and 2018, and individual food consumption data from 10 populations of consumers from different countries and from different age groups. Exposure estimates were obtained by means of a two-dimensional probabilistic model, which was implemented in SAS ® software. The characterisation of cumulative risk was supported by an uncertainty analysis based on expert knowledge elicitation. For each of the 10 populations, it is concluded with varying degrees of certainty that cumulative exposure to pesticides contributing to the chronic inhibition of acetylcholinesterase does not exceed the threshold for regulatory consideration established by risk managers.

A retain and refine approach to cumulative risk assessment.

Mixtures of substances to which humans are exposed may lead to cumulative exposure and health effects. To study their effects, it is first necessary to identify a cumulative assessment group (CAG) of substances for risk assessment or hazard testing. Excluding substances from consideration before there is sufficient evidence may underestimate the risk. Conversely, including everything and treating the inevitable uncertainties using conservative assumptions is inefficient and may overestimate the risk, with an unknown level of protection. An efficient, transparent strategy is described to retain a large group, quantifying the uncertainty of group membership and other uncertainties. Iterative refinement of the CAG then focuses on adding information for the substances with high probability of contributing significantly to the risk. Probabilities can be estimated using expert opinion or derived from data on substance properties. An example is presented with 100 pesticides, in which the retain step identified a single substance to target refinement. Using an updated hazard characterisation for this substance reduced the mean exposure estimate from 0.43 to 0.28 µg kg-bw-1 day-1 and reduced the 99.99th percentile exposure from 24.9 to 5.1 µg kg-bw-1 day-1. Other retained substances contributed little to the risk estimates, even after accounting for uncertainty.

Establishment of cumulative assessment groups of pesticides for their effects on the nervous system.

Cumulative assessment groups of pesticides have been established for five effects on the nervous system: brain and/or erythrocyte acetylcholinesterase inhibition, functional alterations of the motor, sensory and autonomic divisions, and histological neuropathological changes in neural tissue. Sources of uncertainties resulting from the methodological approach and from the limitations in available data and scientific knowledge have been identified and considered. This report supports the publication of a scientific report on cumulative risk assessment to pesticides affecting the nervous system, in which all uncertainties identified for either the exposure assessment or the establishment of the cumulative assessment groups are incorporated into a consolidated risk characterisation.

Establishment of cumulative assessment groups of pesticides for their effects on the thyroid.

Cumulative assessment groups of pesticides have been established for two specific effects on the thyroid: firstly hypothyroidism, and secondly parafollicular cell (C-cell) hypertrophy, hyperplasia and neoplasia. Sources of uncertainties resulting from the methodological approach and from the limitations in available data and scientific knowledge have been identified and considered. This report supports the publication of a scientific report on cumulative risk assessment to pesticides affecting the thyroid, in which all uncertainties identified for either the exposure assessment or the establishment of the cumulative assessment groups are incorporated into a consolidated risk characterisation.

Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment.

This Guidance describes a two-phase approach for a fit-for-purpose method for the assessment of plant pest risk in the territory of the EU. Phase one consists of pest categorisation to determine whether the pest has the characteristics of a quarantine pest or those of a regulated non-quarantine pest for the area of the EU. Phase two consists of pest risk assessment, which may be requested by the risk managers following the pest categorisation results. This Guidance provides a template for pest categorisation and describes in detail the use of modelling and expert knowledge elicitation to conduct a pest risk assessment. The Guidance provides support and a framework for assessors to provide quantitative estimates, together with associated uncertainties, regarding the entry, establishment, spread and impact of plant pests in the EU. The Guidance allows the effectiveness of risk reducing options (RROs) to be quantitatively assessed as an integral part of the assessment framework. A list of RROs is provided. A two-tiered approach is proposed for the use of expert knowledge elicitation and modelling. Depending on data and resources available and the needs of risk managers, pest entry, establishment, spread and impact steps may be assessed directly, using weight of evidence and quantitative expert judgement (first tier), or they may be elaborated in substeps using quantitative models (second tier). An example of an application of the first tier approach is provided. Guidance is provided on how to derive models of appropriate complexity to conduct a second tier assessment. Each assessment is operationalised using Monte Carlo simulations that can compare scenarios for relevant factors, e.g. with or without RROs. This document provides guidance on how to compare scenarios to draw conclusions on the magnitude of pest risks and the effectiveness of RROs and on how to communicate assessment results.

New approaches to uncertainty analysis for use in aggregate and cumulative risk assessment of pesticides.

Risk assessments for human exposures to plant protection products (PPPs) have traditionally focussed on single routes of exposure and single compounds. Extensions to estimate aggregate (multi-source) and cumulative (multi-compound) exposure from PPPs present many new challenges and additional uncertainties that should be addressed as part of risk analysis and decision-making. A general approach is outlined for identifying and classifying the relevant uncertainties and variabilities. The implementation of uncertainty analysis within the MCRA software, developed as part of the EU-funded ACROPOLIS project to address some of these uncertainties, is demonstrated. An example is presented for dietary and non-dietary exposures to the triazole class of compounds. This demonstrates the chaining of models, linking variability and uncertainty generated from an external model for bystander exposure with variability and uncertainty in MCRA dietary exposure assessments. A new method is also presented for combining pesticide usage survey information with limited residue monitoring data, to address non-detect uncertainty. The results show that incorporating usage information reduces uncertainty in parameters of the residue distribution but that in this case quantifying uncertainty is not a priority, at least for UK grown crops. A general discussion of alternative approaches to treat uncertainty, either quantitatively or qualitatively, is included.

A European model and case studies for aggregate exposure assessment of pesticides.

Exposures to plant protection products (PPPs) are assessed using risk analysis methods to protect public health. Traditionally, single sources, such as food or individual occupational sources, have been addressed. In reality, individuals can be exposed simultaneously to multiple sources. Improved regulation therefore requires the development of new tools for estimating the population distribution of exposures aggregated within an individual. A new aggregate model is described, which allows individual users to include as much, or as little, information as is available or relevant for their particular scenario. Depending on the inputs provided by the user, the outputs can range from simple deterministic values through to probabilistic analyses including characterisations of variability and uncertainty. Exposures can be calculated for multiple compounds, routes and sources of exposure. The aggregate model links to the cumulative dietary exposure model developed in parallel and is implemented in the web-based software tool MCRA. Case studies are presented to illustrate the potential of this model, with inputs drawn from existing European data sources and models. These cover exposures to UK arable spray operators, Italian vineyard spray operators, Netherlands users of a consumer spray and UK bystanders/residents. The model could also be adapted to handle non-PPP compounds.

Selection of appropriate tumour data sets for Benchmark Dose Modelling (BMD) and derivation of a Margin of Exposure (MoE) for substances that are genotoxic and carcinogenic: considerations of biological relevance of tumour type, data quality and uncertainty assessment.

This article addresses a number of concepts related to the selection and modelling of carcinogenicity data for the calculation of a Margin of Exposure. It follows up on the recommendations put forward by the International Life Sciences Institute - European branch in 2010 on the application of the Margin of Exposure (MoE) approach to substances in food that are genotoxic and carcinogenic. The aims are to provide practical guidance on the relevance of animal tumour data for human carcinogenic hazard assessment, appropriate selection of tumour data for Benchmark Dose Modelling, and approaches for dealing with the uncertainty associated with the selection of data for modelling and, consequently, the derived Point of Departure (PoD) used to calculate the MoE. Although the concepts outlined in this article are interrelated, the background expertise needed to address each topic varies. For instance, the expertise needed to make a judgement on biological relevance of a specific tumour type is clearly different to that needed to determine the statistical uncertainty around the data used for modelling a benchmark dose. As such, each topic is dealt with separately to allow those with specialised knowledge to target key areas of guidance and provide a more in-depth discussion on each subject for those new to the concept of the Margin of Exposure approach.

Benefit-risk assessment of plant sterols in margarine: a QALIBRA case study.

This paper presents the benefit-risk assessment of adding plant sterols to margarine as an illustration of the QALIBRA method and software. With the QALIBRA tool health effects, risks as well as benefits are expressed in a common metric (DALY) which allows quantitative balancing of benefits and risks of food intake. The QALIBRA software can handle uncertainties in a probabilistic simulation. This simple case study illustrates the data need and assumptions that go into a quantitative benefit-risk assessment. The assessment shows that the benefits of plant sterols added to margarine outweigh the risks, if any.

Qalibra: a general model for food risk-benefit assessment that quantifies variability and uncertainty.

The EU project BRAFO proposed a framework for risk-benefit assessment of foods, or changes in diet, that present both potential risks and potential benefits to consumers (Hoekstra et al., 2012a). In higher tiers of the BRAFO framework, risks and benefits are integrated quantitatively to estimate net health impact measured in DALYs or QALYs (disability- or quality-adjusted life years). This paper describes a general model that was developed by a second EU project, Qalibra, to assist users in conducting these assessments. Its flexible design makes it applicable to a wide range of dietary questions involving different nutrients, contaminants and health effects. Account can be taken of variation between consumers in their diets and also other characteristics relevant to the estimation of risk and benefit, such as body weight, gender and age. Uncertainty in any input parameter may be quantified probabilistically, using probability distributions, or deterministically by repeating the assessment with alternative assumptions. Uncertainties that are not quantified should be evaluated qualitatively. Outputs produced by the model are illustrated using results from a simple assessment of fish consumption. More detailed case studies on oily fish and phytosterols are presented in companion papers. The model can be accessed as web-based software at www.qalibra.eu.

Application of the BRAFO tiered approach for benefit-risk assessment to case studies on heat processing contaminants.

The aim of the European Funded Project BRAFO (benefit-risk analysis of foods) project was to develop a framework that allows quantitative comparison of human health risks and benefits of foods based on a common scale of measurement. This publication describes the application of the BRAFO methodology to three different case studies: the formation of acrylamide in potato and cereal based products, the formation of benzo(a)pyrene through smoking and grilling of meat and fish and the heat-treatment of milk. Reference, alternative scenario and target population represented the basic structure to test the tiers of the framework. Various intervention methods intended to reduce acrylamide in potato and cereal products were evaluated against the historical production methods. In conclusion the benefits of the acrylamide-reducing measures were considered prevailing. For benzo(a)pyrene, three illustrated alternative scenarios were evaluated against the most common smoking practice. The alternative scenarios were assessed as delivering benefits, introducing only minimal potential risks. Similar considerations were made for heat treatment of milk where the comparison of the microbiological effects of heat treatment, physico-chemical changes of milk constituents with positive and negative health effects was assessed. In general, based on data available, benefits of the heat treatment were outweighing any risks.

BRAFO tiered approach for Benefit-Risk Assessment of Foods.

BRAFO stands for Benefit-Risk Analysis for Foods. This European Commission funded project aims at developing a framework that allows quantitative comparison of human health risks and benefits of foods and food compounds based on a common scale of measurement. A methodology group brought together methodologies from several disciplines relevant to the evaluation of risks and benefits in food. This group reviewed and assembled the methodologies available. They produced this guidance document that describes a tiered ('stepwise') approach for performing a risk and benefit assessment of foods. This process starts with pre-assessment and problem formulation to set the scope of the assessment. This includes defining two scenarios, the reference and an alternative that are compared in the assessment. The approach consists of four tiers. In many cases, a lower tier assessment in which risks and benefits are qualitatively evaluated may be sufficient to show a clear difference between the health impacts of the two scenarios. In other cases, increasingly sophisticated methods to integrate risks and benefits quantitatively are used at higher tiers to assess the net health impact.

Development of a framework based on an ecosystem services approach for deriving specific protection goals for environmental risk assessment of pesticides.

General protection goals for the environmental risk assessment (ERA) of plant protection products are stated in European legislation but specific protection goals (SPGs) are often not precisely defined. These are however crucial for designing appropriate risk assessment schemes. The process followed by the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) as well as examples of resulting SPGs obtained so far for environmental risk assessment (ERA) of pesticides is presented. The ecosystem services approach was used as an overarching concept for the development of SPGs, which will likely facilitate communication with stakeholders in general and risk managers in particular. It is proposed to develop SPG options for 7 key drivers for ecosystem services (microbes, algae, non target plants (aquatic and terrestrial), aquatic invertebrates, terrestrial non target arthropods including honeybees, terrestrial non-arthropod invertebrates, and vertebrates), covering the ecosystem services that could potentially be affected by the use of pesticides. These SPGs need to be defined in 6 dimensions: biological entity, attribute, magnitude, temporal and geographical scale of the effect, and the degree of certainty that the specified level of effect will not be exceeded. In general, to ensure ecosystem services, taxa representative for the key drivers identified need to be protected at the population level. However, for some vertebrates and species that have a protection status in legislation, protection may be at the individual level. To protect the provisioning and supporting services provided by microbes it may be sufficient to protect them at the functional group level. To protect biodiversity impacts need to be assessed at least at the scale of the watershed/landscape.

Quantifying experts' uncertainty about the future cost of exotic diseases.

Since the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak of 2001 in the United Kingdom, there has been debate about the sharing, between government and industry, both the costs of livestock disease outbreaks and responsibility for the decisions that give rise to them. As part of a consultation into the formation of a new body to manage livestock diseases, government veterinarians and economists produced estimates of the average annual costs for a number of exotic infectious diseases. In this article, we demonstrate how the government experts were helped to quantify their uncertainties about the cost estimates using formal expert elicitation techniques. This has enabled the decisionmakers to have a greater appreciation of government experts' uncertainty in this policy area.

Variation in the level of protection afforded to birds and crustaceans exposed to different pesticides under standard risk assessment procedures.

First-tier risk assessment for pesticides is often based on the quotient of the toxicity divided by the predicted environmental concentration or dose. This ratio is compared to a fixed assessment factor (AF) to decide whether the pesticide is to be allowed on the market or whether further research is needed. Often, a high value (e.g., the 90th percentile) is assumed for the predicted environmental concentration, and the lowest available value is chosen to represent toxicity; yet, the real level of protection is not known. Therefore, it is also not known whether the first tier is conservative enough or too conservative. By using 2 large toxicity databases and assuming a log-logistic species sensitivity distribution for each pesticide, the percent of species not covered by the AF is estimated in the scenario, where exposure is at the maximum level allowable in the first tier. In the case of crustaceans, the median estimate of the fraction of species not covered by the AF of 100 in the first-tier scenario is 3.4%, on average, for 72 pesticides. In other words, on average, 3.4% of the crustacean species will be exposed above their median lethal concentration (LC50) and median lethal dose (LD50) value in 10% of receiving surface waters that receive the maximum allowable exposure to an individual pesticide. The estimated level of protection varies widely between pesticides. For 10% of the pesticides, the estimated fraction of species not covered is ≥10% (maximum=41.4%). For 28% of the pesticides, 99.9% of the species will have the assumed level of protection. For birds, the median estimate of the fraction of species exposed above their median lethal dose for the first-tier scenario (AF=10) is 3.0% on average, when the AF is applied to the lower of the toxicity values for the 2 standard test species. For 11% of the pesticides, the median estimate is ≥10% (maximum=15.7%). When the AF is applied instead to the geometric mean of the toxicity values for the 2 standard species, the median estimate of the fraction of species not covered by the AF is increased to 7.4% on average; for 31% of the pesticides, this fraction is ≥10% (maximum=33.4%). This variation in the level of protection should be considered when defining the assumptions, assessment factors, and decision criteria in regulatory risk assessment.

On the application of loss functions in determining assessment factors for ecological risk.

Assessment factors have been proposed as a means to extrapolate from data on the concentrations hazardous to a small sample of species to the concentration hazardous to p% of the species in a given community (HCp). Aldenberg and Jaworska [2000. Uncertainty of the hazardous concentration and fraction affected for normal species sensitivity distributions. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 46, 1-18] proposed estimators that prescribed universal assessment factors which made use of distributional assumptions associated with species sensitivity distributions. In this paper we maintain those assumptions but introduce loss functions which punish over- and under-estimation. Furthermore, the final loss function is parameterised such that conservatism can be asymmetrically and non-linearly controlled which enables one to better represent the reality of risk assessment scenarios. We describe the loss functions and derive Bayes rules for each. We demonstrate the method by producing a table of universal factors that are independent of the substance being assessed and which can be combined with the toxicity data in order to estimate the HC5. Finally, through an example we illustrate the potential strength of the newly proposed estimators which rationally accounts for the costs of under- and over-estimation to choose an estimator; as opposed to arbitrarily choosing a one-sided lower confidence limit.

Probabilistic risk assessment for snails, slugs, and endangered honeycreepers in diphacinone rodenticide baited areas on Hawaii, USA.

Three probabilistic models were developed for characterizing the risk of mortality and subacute coagulopathy to Poouli, an endangered nontarget avian species, in broadcast diphacinone-baited areas on Hawaii, USA. For single-day exposure, the risk of Poouli mortality approaches 0. For 5-d exposure, the mean probability of mortality increased to 3% for adult and 8% for juvenile Poouli populations. For Poouli that consume snails containing diphacinone residues for 14 d, the model predicted increased levels of coagulopathy for 0.42 and 11% of adult and juvenile Poouli populations, respectively. Worst-case deterministic risk characterizations predicted acceptable levels of risk for nonthreatened or endangered species such as northern bobwhite quail and mallards. Also, no acute toxicity was noted for snails and slugs that feed on diphacinone baits.