New approach to weight-of-evidence assessment of ecotoxicological effects in regulatory decision-making.

Ecological risk assessments and risk management decisions are only as sound as the underlying information and processes to integrate them. It is important to develop transparent and reproducible procedures a priori to integrate often-heterogeneous evidence. Current weight-of-evidence (WoE) approaches for effects or hazard assessment tend to conflate aspects of the assessment of the quality of the data with the strength of the body of evidence as a whole. We take forward recent developments in the critical appraisal of the reliability and relevance of individual ecotoxicological studies as part of the effect or hazard assessment of prospective risk assessments and propose a streamlined WoE approach. The aim is to avoid overlap and double accounting of criteria used in reliability and relevance with that used in current WoE methods. The protection goals, problem formulation, and evaluation process need to be clarified at the outset. The data are first integrated according to lines of evidence (LoEs), typically mechanistic insights (e.g., cellular, subcellular, genomic), in vivo experiments, and higher-tiered field or observational studies. Data are then plotted on the basis of both relevance and reliability scores or categories. This graphical approach provides a means to visually assess and communicate the credibility (reliability and relevance of available individual studies), quantity, diversity, and consistency of the evidence. In addition, the external coherence of the body of evidence needs to be considered. The final step in the process is to derive an expression of the confidence in the conclusions of integrating the information considering these 5 aspects in the context of remaining uncertainties. We suggest that this streamlined approach to WoE for the effects or hazard characterization should facilitate reproducible and transparent assessments of data across different regulatory requirements. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:573-579. © 2017 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Current limitations and recommendations to improve testing for the environmental assessment of endocrine active substances.

In the present study, existing regulatory frameworks and test systems for assessing potential endocrine active chemicals are described, and associated challenges are discussed, along with proposed approaches to address these challenges. Regulatory frameworks vary somewhat across geographies, but all basically evaluate whether a chemical possesses endocrine activity and whether this activity can result in adverse outcomes either to humans or to the environment. Current test systems include in silico, in vitro, and in vivo techniques focused on detecting potential endocrine activity, and in vivo tests that collect apical data to detect possible adverse effects. These test systems are currently designed to robustly assess endocrine activity and/or adverse effects in the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid hormone signaling pathways; however, there are some limitations of current test systems for evaluating endocrine hazard and risk. These limitations include a lack of certainty regarding: 1) adequately sensitive species and life stages; 2) mechanistic endpoints that are diagnostic for endocrine pathways of concern; and 3) the linkage between mechanistic responses and apical, adverse outcomes. Furthermore, some existing test methods are resource intensive with regard to time, cost, and use of animals. However, based on recent experiences, there are opportunities to improve approaches to and guidance for existing test methods and to reduce uncertainty. For example, in vitro high-throughput screening could be used to prioritize chemicals for testing and provide insights as to the most appropriate assays for characterizing hazard and risk. Other recommendations include adding endpoints for elucidating connections between mechanistic effects and adverse outcomes, identifying potentially sensitive taxa for which test methods currently do not exist, and addressing key endocrine pathways of possible concern in addition to those associated with estrogen, androgen, and thyroid signaling. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:302-316. © 2016 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Identification, assessment and management of "endocrine disruptors" in wildlife in the EU substance legislation--discussion paper from the German Federal Environment Agency (UBA).

A discussion paper was developed by a panel of experts of the German Federal Environment Agency (UBA) contributing to the on-going debate on the identification, assessment and management of endocrine disruptors with a view to protect wildlife according to the EU substance legislation (plant protection products, biocides, industrial chemicals). Based on a critical synthesis of the state-of-the-art regarding regulatory requirements, testing methods, assessment schemes, decision-making criteria and risk management options, we advise an appropriate and consistent implementation of this important subject into existing chemicals legislation in Europe. Our proposal for a balanced risk management of endocrine disruptors essentially advocates transparent regulatory decision making based on a scientifically robust weight of evidence approach and an adequate risk management consistent across different legislations. With respect to the latter, a more explicit consideration of the principle of proportionality of regulatory decision making and socio-economic benefits in the on-going debate is further encouraged.