RESUMO
Bisphenol A (BPA), a synthetic chemical widely used in the production of polycarbonate plastic and epoxy resins, has been associated with a variety of adverse effects in humans including metabolic, immunological, reproductive, and neurodevelopmental effects, raising concern about its health impact. In the EU, it has been classified as toxic to reproduction and as an endocrine disruptor and was thus included in the candidate list of substances of very high concern (SVHC). On this basis, its use has been banned or restricted in some products. As a consequence, industries turned to bisphenol alternatives, such as bisphenol S (BPS) and bisphenol F (BPF), which are now found in various consumer products, as well as in human matrices at a global scale. However, due to their toxicity, these two bisphenols are in the process of being regulated. Other BPA alternatives, whose potential toxicity remains largely unknown due to a knowledge gap, have also started to be used in manufacturing processes. The gradual restriction of the use of BPA underscores the importance of understanding the potential risks associated with its alternatives to avoid regrettable substitutions. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge on the potential hazards related to BPA alternatives prioritized by European Regulatory Agencies based on their regulatory relevance and selected to be studied under the European Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals (PARC): BPE, BPAP, BPP, BPZ, BPS-MAE, and TCBPA. The focus is on data related to toxicokinetic, endocrine disruption, immunotoxicity, developmental neurotoxicity, and genotoxicity/carcinogenicity, which were considered the most relevant endpoints to assess the hazard related to those substances. The goal here is to identify the data gaps in BPA alternatives toxicology and hence formulate the future directions that will be taken in the frame of the PARC project, which seeks also to enhance chemical risk assessment methodologies using new approach methodologies (NAMs).
RESUMO
In the European regulatory context, rodent in vivo studies are the predominant source of neurotoxicity information. Although they form a cornerstone of neurotoxicological assessments, they are costly and the topic of ethical debate. While the public expects chemicals and products to be safe for the developing and mature nervous systems, considerable numbers of chemicals in commerce have not, or only to a limited extent, been assessed for their potential to cause neurotoxicity. As such, there is a societal push toward the replacement of animal models with in vitro or alternative methods. New approach methods (NAMs) can contribute to the regulatory knowledge base, increase chemical safety, and modernize chemical hazard and risk assessment. Provided they reach an acceptable level of regulatory relevance and reliability, NAMs may be considered as replacements for specific in vivo studies. The European Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals (PARC) addresses challenges to the development and implementation of NAMs in chemical risk assessment. In collaboration with regulatory agencies, Project 5.2.1e (Neurotoxicity) aims to develop and evaluate NAMs for developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) and adult neurotoxicity (ANT) and to understand the applicability domain of specific NAMs for the detection of endocrine disruption and epigenetic perturbation. To speed up assay time and reduce costs, we identify early indicators of later-onset effects. Ultimately, we will assemble second-generation developmental neurotoxicity and first-generation adult neurotoxicity test batteries, both of which aim to provide regulatory hazard and risk assessors and industry stakeholders with robust, speedy, lower-cost, and informative next-generation hazard and risk assessment tools.