Evaluation of in silico model predictions for mammalian acute oral toxicity and regulatory application in pesticide hazard and risk assessment.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) uses the lethal dose 50% (LD50) value from in vivo rat acute oral toxicity studies for pesticide product label precautionary statements and environmental risk assessment (RA). The Collaborative Acute Toxicity Modeling Suite (CATMoS) is a quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR)-based in silico approach to predict rat acute oral toxicity that has the potential to reduce animal use when registering a new pesticide technical grade active ingredient (TGAI). This analysis compared LD50 values predicted by CATMoS to empirical values from in vivo studies for the TGAIs of 177 conventional pesticides. The accuracy and reliability of the model predictions were assessed relative to the empirical data in terms of USEPA acute oral toxicity categories and discrete LD50 values for each chemical. CATMoS was most reliable at placing pesticide TGAIs in acute toxicity categories III (>500-5000 mg/kg) and IV (>5000 mg/kg), with 88% categorical concordance for 165 chemicals with empirical in vivo LD50 values ≥ 500 mg/kg. When considering an LD50 for RA, CATMoS predictions of 2000 mg/kg and higher were found to agree with empirical values from limit tests (i.e., single, high-dose tests) or definitive results over 2000 mg/kg with few exceptions.

Integration of toxicodynamic and toxicokinetic new approach methods into a weight-of-evidence analysis for pesticide developmental neurotoxicity assessment: A case-study with DL- and L-glufosinate.

DL-glufosinate ammonium (DL-GLF) is a registered herbicide for which a guideline Developmental Neurotoxicity (DNT) study has been conducted. Offspring effects included altered brain morphometrics, decreased body weight, and increased motor activity. Guideline DNT studies are not available for its enriched isomers L-GLF acid and L-GLF ammonium; conducting one would be time consuming, resource-intensive, and possibly redundant given the existing DL-GLF DNT. To support deciding whether to request a guideline DNT study for the L-GLF isomers, DL-GLF and the L-GLF isomers were screened using in vitro assays for network formation and neurite outgrowth. DL-GLF and L-GLF isomers were without effects in both assays. DL-GLF and L-GLF (1-100 µM) isomers increased mean firing rate of mature networks to 120-140% of baseline. In vitro toxicokinetic assessments were used to derive administered equivalent doses (AEDs) for the in vitro testing concentrations. The AED for L-GLF was ∼3X higher than the NOAEL from the DL-GLF DNT indicating that the available guideline study would be protective of potential DNT due to L-GLF exposure. Based in part on the results of these in vitro studies, EPA is not requiring L-GLF isomer guideline DNT studies, thereby providing a case study for a useful application of DNT screening assays.

Rethinking chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity assessment for agrochemicals project (ReCAAP): A reporting framework to support a weight of evidence safety assessment without long-term rodent bioassays.

Rodent cancer bioassays have been long-required studies for regulatory assessment of human cancer hazard and risk. These studies use hundreds of animals, are resource intensive, and certain aspects of these studies have limited human relevance. The past 10 years have seen an exponential growth of new technologies with the potential to effectively evaluate human cancer hazard and risk while reducing, refining, or replacing animal use. To streamline and facilitate uptake of new technologies, a workgroup comprised of scientists from government, academia, non-governmental organizations, and industry stakeholders developed a framework for waiver rationales of rodent cancer bioassays for consideration in agrochemical safety assessment. The workgroup used an iterative approach, incorporating regulatory agency feedback, and identifying critical information to be considered in a risk assessment-based weight of evidence determination of the need for rodent cancer bioassays. The reporting framework described herein was developed to support a chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity study waiver rationale, which includes information on use pattern(s), exposure scenario(s), pesticidal mode-of-action, physicochemical properties, metabolism, toxicokinetics, toxicological data including mechanistic data, and chemical read-across from similar registered pesticides. The framework could also be applied to endpoints other than chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity, and for chemicals other than agrochemicals.

Opportunities and challenges related to saturation of toxicokinetic processes: Implications for risk assessment.

Top dose selection for repeated dose animal studies has generally focused on identification of apical endpoints, use of the limit dose, or determination of a maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The intent is to optimize the ability of toxicity tests performed in a small number of animals to detect effects for hazard identification. An alternative approach, the kinetically derived maximum dose (KMD), has been proposed as a mechanism to integrate toxicokinetic (TK) data into the dose selection process. The approach refers to the dose above which the systemic exposures depart from being proportional to external doses. This non-linear external-internal dose relationship arises from saturation or limitation of TK process(es), such as absorption or metabolism. The importance of TK information is widely acknowledged when assessing human health risks arising from exposures to environmental chemicals, as TK determines the amount of chemical at potential sites of toxicological responses. However, there have been differing opinions and interpretations within the scientific and regulatory communities related to the validity and application of the KMD concept. A multi-stakeholder working group, led by the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI), was formed to provide an opportunity for impacted stakeholders to address commonly raised scientific and technical issues related to this topic and, more specifically, a weight of evidence approach is recommended to inform design and dose selection for repeated dose animal studies. Commonly raised challenges related to the use of TK data for dose selection are discussed, recommendations are provided, and illustrative case examples are provided to address these challenges or refute misconceptions.

A weight of evidence approach to investigate potential common mechanisms in pesticide groups to support cumulative risk assessment: A case study with dinitroaniline pesticides.

In 2016, the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Pesticide Programs published guidelines for establishing candidate common mechanism groups (CMGs) for cumulative risk assessment (CRA) weight-of-evidence-based screenings. A candidate CMG is a group of chemicals that may share similar structure, apical endpoints, and/or mechanistic data that suggest the potential for a common mechanism of toxicity among them. Here, a weight-of-evidence approach is presented to establish candidacy of a CMG for a group of nine dinitroaniline pesticides. This approach involves review of available in vivo toxicity information and literature to determine mode of action, along with analyses of in vitro toxicity data and chemical structure. Despite structural similarity among some dinitroanilines and some shared target organs identified through toxicity observed in in vivo studies, there were no consistencies among groups, suggesting lack of a common mechanism when all analyses are considered together. For example, two structurally similar compounds with thyroid/liver in vivo effects were not found active in any Toxicity Forecaster (ToxCast) in vitro assays. The weight-of-evidence is insufficient to support the testable hypothesis that dinitroanilines could form a CMG, and highlights the importance of establishing a consensus among multiple lines of evidence prior to CRA.

Use of the RISK21 roadmap and matrix: human health risk assessment of the use of a pyrethroid in bed netting.

The HESI-coordinated RISK21 roadmap and matrix are tools that provide a transparent method to compare exposure and toxicity information and assess whether additional refinement is required to obtain the necessary precision level for a decision regarding safety. A case study of the use of a pyrethroid, "pseudomethrin," in bed netting to control malaria is presented to demonstrate the application of the roadmap and matrix. The evaluation began with a problem formulation step. The first assessment utilized existing information pertaining to the use and the class of chemistry. At each stage of the step-wise approach, the precision of the toxicity and exposure estimates were refined as necessary by obtaining key data which enabled a decision on safety to be made efficiently and with confidence. The evaluation demonstrated the concept of using existing information within the RISK21 matrix to drive the generation of additional data using a value-of-information approach. The use of the matrix highlighted whether exposure or toxicity required further investigation and emphasized the need to address the default uncertainty factor of 100 at the highest tier of the evaluation. It also showed how new methodology such as the use of in vitro studies and assays could be used to answer the specific questions which arise through the use of the matrix. The matrix also serves as a useful means to communicate progress to stakeholders during an assessment of chemical use.

Workshop overview: arsenic research and risk assessment.

The chronic exposure of humans through consumption of high levels of inorganic arsenic (iAs)-contaminated drinking water is associated with skin lesions, peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, and cancers. Additionally, humans are exposed to organic arsenicals when used as pesticides and herbicides (e.g., monomethylarsonic acid, dimethylarsinic acid (DMA(V)) also known as cacodylic acid). Extensive research has been conducted to characterize the adverse health effects that result from exposure to iAs and its metabolites to describe the biological pathway(s) that lead to adverse health effects. To further this effort, on May 31, 2006, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) sponsored a meeting entitled "Workshop on Arsenic Research and Risk Assessment". The invited participants from government agencies, academia, independent research organizations and consultants were asked to present their current research. The overall focus of these research efforts has been to determine the potential human health risks due to environmental exposures to arsenicals. Pursuant in these efforts is the elucidation of a mode of action for arsenicals. This paper provides a brief overview of the workshop goals, regulatory context for arsenical research, mode of action (MOA) analysis in human health risk assessment, and the application of MOA analysis for iAs and DMA(V). Subsequent papers within this issue will present the research discussed at the workshop, ensuing discussions, and conclusions of the workshop.