A UK framework for the assessment and integration of different scientific evidence streams in chemical risk assessment.

BACKGROUND: Few methods are available for transparently combining different evidence streams for chemical risk assessment to reach an integrated conclusion on the probability of causation. Hence, the UK Committees on Toxicity (COT) and on Carcinogenicity (COC) have reviewed current practice and developed guidance on how to achieve this in a transparent manner, using graphical visualisation. METHODS/APPROACH: All lines of evidence, including toxicological, epidemiological, new approach methodologies, and mode of action should be considered, taking account of their strengths/weaknesses in their relative weighting towards a conclusion on the probability of causation. A qualitative estimate of the probability of causation is plotted for each line of evidence and a combined estimate provided. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Guidance is provided on integration of multiple lines of evidence for causation, based on current best practice. Qualitative estimates of probability for each line of evidence are plotted graphically. This ensures a deliberative, consensus conclusion on likelihood of causation is reached. It also ensures clear communication of the influence of the different lines of evidence on the overall conclusion on causality. Issues on which advice from the respective Committees is sought varies considerably, hence the guidance is designed to be sufficiently flexible to meet this need.

A novel method to derive a human safety limit for PFOA by gene expression profiling and modelling.

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is a persistent environmental contaminant that can accumulate in the human body due to its long half-life. This substance has been associated with liver, pancreatic, testicular and breast cancers, liver steatosis and endocrine disruption. PFOA is a member of a large group of substances also known as "forever chemicals" and the vast majority of substances of this group lack toxicological data that would enable their effective risk assessment in terms of human health hazards. This study aimed to derive a health-based guidance value for PFOA intake (ng/kg BW/day) from in vitro transcriptomics data. To this end, we developed an in silico workflow comprising five components: (i) sourcing in vitro hepatic transcriptomics concentration-response data; (ii) deriving molecular points of departure using BMDExpress3 and performing pathway analysis using gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) to identify the most sensitive molecular pathways to PFOA exposure; (iii) estimating freely-dissolved PFOA concentrations in vitro using a mass balance model; (iv) estimating in vivo doses by reverse dosimetry using a PBK model for PFOA as part of a quantitative in vitro to in vivo extrapolation (QIVIVE) algorithm; and (v) calculating a tolerable daily intake (TDI) for PFOA. Fourteen percent of interrogated genes exhibited in vitro concentration-response relationships. GSEA pathway enrichment analysis revealed that "fatty acid metabolism" was the most sensitive pathway to PFOA exposure. In vitro free PFOA concentrations were calculated to be 2.9% of the nominal applied concentrations, and these free concentrations were input into the QIVIVE workflow. Exposure doses for a virtual population of 3,000 individuals were estimated, from which a TDI of 0.15 ng/kg BW/day for PFOA was calculated using the benchmark dose modelling software, PROAST. This TDI is comparable to previously published values of 1.16, 0.69, and 0.86 ng/kg BW/day by the European Food Safety Authority. In conclusion, this study demonstrates the combined utility of an "omics"-derived molecular point of departure and in silico QIVIVE workflow for setting health-based guidance values in anticipation of the acceptance of in vitro concentration-response molecular measurements in chemical risk assessment.

The probable future of toxicology - probabilistic risk assessment.

Both because of the shortcomings of existing risk assessment methodologies, as well as newly available tools to predict hazard and risk with machine learning approaches, there has been an emerging emphasis on probabilistic risk assessment. Increasingly sophisticated AI models can be applied to a plethora of exposure and hazard data to obtain not only predictions for particular endpoints but also to estimate the uncertainty of the risk assessment outcome. This provides the basis for a shift from deterministic to more probabilistic approaches but comes at the cost of an increased complexity of the process as it requires more resources and human expertise. There are still challenges to overcome before a probabilistic paradigm is fully embraced by regulators. Based on an earlier white paper (Maertens et al., 2022), a workshop discussed the prospects, challenges and path forward for implementing such AI-based probabilistic hazard assessment. Moving forward, we will see the transition from categorized into probabilistic and dose-dependent hazard outcomes, the application of internal thresholds of toxicological concern for data-poor substances, the acknowledgement of user-friendly open-source software, a rise in the expertise of toxicologists required to understand and interpret artificial intelligence models, and the honest communication of uncertainty in risk assessment to the public.

Probabilistic risk assessment, initially from engineering, is applied in toxicology to understand chemical-related hazards and their consequences. In toxicology, uncertainties abound ­ unclear molecular events, varied proposed outcomes, and population-level assessments for issues like neurodevelopmental disorders. Establishing links between chemical exposures and diseases, especially rare events like birth defects, often demands extensive studies. Existing methods struggle with subtle effects or those affecting specific groups. Future risk assessments must address developmental disease origins, presenting challenges beyond current capabilities. The intricate nature of many toxicological processes, lack of consensus on mechanisms and outcomes, and the need for nuanced population-level assessments highlight the complexities in understanding and quantifying risks associated with chemical exposures in the field of toxicology.