Opportunities in Assessing and Regulating Organohalogen Flame Retardants (OFRs) as a Class in Consumer Products.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) received and then, in 2017, granted a petition under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act to declare certain groups of consumer products as banned hazardous substances if they contain nonpolymeric, additive organohalogen flame retardants (OFRs). The petitioners asked the CPSC to regulate OFRs as a single chemical class with similar health effects. The CPSC later sponsored a National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) report in 2019, which ultimately identified 161 OFRs and grouped them into 14 subclasses based on chemical structural similarity. In 2021, a follow-up discussion was held among a group of scientists from both inside and outside of the CPSC for current research on OFRs and to promote collaboration that could increase public awareness of CPSC work and support the class-based approach for the CPSC's required risk assessment of OFRs. OBJECTIVES: Given the extensive data collected to date, there is a need to synthesize what is known about OFR and how class-based regulations have previously managed this information. This commentary discusses both OFR exposure and OFR toxicity and fills some gaps for OFR exposure that were not within the scope of the NASEM report. The objective of this commentary is therefore to provide an overview of the OFR research presented at SOT 2021, explore opportunities and challenges associated with OFR risk assessment, and inform CPSC's work on an OFR class-based approach. DISCUSSION: A class-based approach for regulating OFRs can be successful. Expanding the use of read-across and the use of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in assessing and regulating existing chemicals was considered as a necessary part of the class-based process. Recommendations for OFR class-based risk assessment include the need to balance fire and chemical safety and to protect vulnerable populations, including children and pregnant women. The authors also suggest the CPSC should consider global, federal, and state OFR regulations. The lack of data or lack of concordance in toxicity data could present significant hurdles for some OFR subclasses. The potential for cumulative risks within or between subclasses, OFR mixtures, and metabolites common to more than one OFR all add extra complexity for class-based risk assessment. This commentary discusses scientific and regulatory challenges for a class-based approach suggested by NASEM. This commentary is offered as a resource for anyone performing class-based assessments and to provide potential collaboration opportunities for OFR stakeholders. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP12725.

FutureTox IV Workshop Summary: Predictive Toxicology for Healthy Children.

FutureTox IV, a Society of Toxicology Contemporary Concepts in Toxicology workshop, was held in November 2018. Building upon FutureTox I, II, and III, this conference focused on the latest science and technology for in vitro profiling and in silico modeling as it relates to predictive developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART). Publicly available high-throughput screening data sets are now available for broad in vitro profiling of bioactivities across large inventories of chemicals. Coupling this vast amount of mechanistic data with a deeper understanding of molecular embryology and post-natal development lays the groundwork for using new approach methodologies (NAMs) to evaluate chemical toxicity, drug efficacy, and safety assessment for embryo-fetal development. NAM is a term recently adopted in reference to any technology, methodology, approach, or combination thereof that can be used to provide information on chemical hazard and risk assessment to avoid the use of intact animals (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], Strategic plan to promote the development and implementation of alternative test methods within the tsca program, 2018, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-06/documents/epa_alt_strat_plan_6-20-18_clean_final.pdf). There are challenges to implementing NAMs to evaluate chemicals for developmental toxicity compared with adult toxicity. This forum article reviews the 2018 workshop activities, highlighting challenges and opportunities for applying NAMs for adverse pregnancy outcomes (eg, preterm labor, malformations, low birth weight) as well as disorders manifesting postnatally (eg, neurodevelopmental impairment, breast cancer, cardiovascular disease, fertility). DART is an important concern for different regulatory statutes and test guidelines. Leveraging advancements in such approaches and the accompanying efficiencies to detecting potential hazards to human development are the unifying concepts toward implementing NAMs in DART testing. Although use of NAMs for higher level regulatory decision making is still on the horizon, the conference highlighted novel testing platforms and computational models that cover multiple levels of biological organization, with the unique temporal dynamics of embryonic development, and novel approaches for estimating toxicokinetic parameters essential in supporting in vitro to in vivo extrapolation.

Considerations for refining the risk assessment process for formaldehyde: Results from an interdisciplinary workshop.

Anticipating the need to evaluate and integrate scientific evidence to inform new risk assessments or to update existing risk assessments, the Formaldehyde Panel of the American Chemistry Council (ACC), in collaboration with the University of North Carolina, convened a workshop: "Understanding Potential Human Health Cancer Risk - From Data Integration to Risk Evaluation" in October 2017. Twenty-four (24) invited-experts participated with expertise in epidemiology, toxicology, science integration and risk evaluation. Including members of the organizing committee, there were 29 participants. The meeting included eleven presentations encompassing an introduction and three sessions: (1) "integrating the formaldehyde science on nasal/nasopharyngeal carcinogenicity and potential for causality"; (2) "integrating the formaldehyde science on lymphohematopoietic cancer and potential for causality; and, (3) "formaldehyde research-data suitable for risk assessment". Here we describe key points from the presentations on epidemiology, toxicology and mechanistic studies that should inform decisions about the potential carcinogenicity of formaldehyde in humans and the discussions about approaches for structuring an integrated, comprehensive risk assessment for formaldehyde. We also note challenges expected when attempting to reconcile divergent results observed from research conducted within and across different scientific disciplines - especially toxicology and epidemiology - and in integrating diverse, multi-disciplinary mechanistic evidence.