Meeting the common needs of a more effective and efficient testing and assessment paradigm for chemical risk management

Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health - Part B: Critical Reviews

Volumn 13, Issue 2-4, 2010, Pages 347-360

  Dellarco, Vicki ^a   Henry, Tala ^a   Sayre, Phil ^a   Seed, Jennifer ^a   Bradbury, Steven ^a  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL AGENT; ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL; PESTICIDE; TOXIC SUBSTANCE;

BIOASSAY; BIOMETRY; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CARCINOGENICITY; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; ECOTOXICITY; ENVIRONMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; HEALTH HAZARD; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MANAGER; MOLECULAR MODEL; NONHUMAN; QUALITY CONTROL; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; REVIEW; RISK; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; SYSTEMS BIOLOGY; TOXICITY TESTING; TOXICOGENETICS; TOXICOLOGY; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED STATES;

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS; HUMANS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; TOXICITY TESTS; UNCERTAINTY; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY;

EID: 77953977912     PISSN: 10937404     EISSN: 15216950     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2010.483950     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Ankley, G. T., Bennett, R. S., Erickson, R. J., Hoff, D. J., Hornung, M. W., Johnson, R. D., Mount, D. R., Nichols, J. W., Russom, C. L., and Schmieder, P. K. 2009. Adverse outcome pathways: A conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 29:1-12.
2. Boobis, A. R., Cohen, S. M., Dellarco, V., McGregor, D., Meek, M. E., Vickers, C., Willcocks, D., and Farland, W. 2006. IPCS framework for analyzing the relevance of a cancer mode of action for humans. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 36:781-792. (Pubitemid 44800328)
3. Boobis, A. R., Doe, J. E., Heinrich-Hirsch, B., Meek, M. E., Munn, S., Ruchirawat, M., Schlatter, J., Seed, J., and Vickers, C. 2008. IPCS framework for analyzing the relevance of a noncancer mode of action for humans. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 38:87-96.
4. Bradbury, S. P., Feijtel, T. C., and Van Leeuwen, C. J. 2004. Meeting the scientific needs of ecological risk assessment in a regulatory context. Environ Sci Technol. 38:463A-470A.
5. Chen, P. J., Padgett, W. T., Moore, T., Winnik, W., Lambert, G. R., Thai, S. F., Hester, S. D., and Nesnow, S. 2009. Three conazoles increase hepatic microsomal retinoic acid metabolism and decrease mouse hepatic retinoic acid levels in vivo. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 234:143-155
6. Christensen, F. M. 2003. Assessment tools under the New European Union Chemicals Policy. GMI 41, pp. 5-19. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing.
7. Combes, R., Barratt, M., and Balls, M. 2003. An overall strategy for the testing of chemicals for human hazard and risk assessment under the EU REACH System. ATLA 31:7-19.
8. Degitz, S. J., Holcombe, G. W., Flynn, K. M., Korte, J. J., and Tietge, J. E. 2005. Progress towards development of an amphibianbased thyroid screening assay using Xenopus laevis. Organismal and thyroidal responses to the model compounds 6-propylthiouracil, methimazole, and thyroxine. Toxicol. Sci. 87:353-364.
9. Dekant, W., Melching-Kollmuß, S., and Kalberlah, F. 2009. Toxicity assessment strategies, data requirements, and risk assessment approaches to derive health based guidance values for non-relevant metabolites of plant protection products. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 56:135-142.
10. Doull, J., Borzelleca, J. F., Becker, R., Daston, G., DeSesso, J., Fan, A., Fenner-Crisp, P., Holsapple, M., Holson, J., Craig Llewellyn, G., MacGregor, J., Seed, J., Walls, I., Woo, Y. T., and Olin, S. 2007. Framework for use of toxicity screening tools in context-based decision-making. Food Chem. Toxicol. 45:759-796.
11. Ellinger-Ziegelbauer, H., Gmuender, H., Bandenburg, A., and Ahr, H. J. 2008. Prediction of a carcinogenic potential of rat hepatocarcinogens using toxicogenomics analysis of short-term in vivo studies. Mutat. Res. 637, 23-39.
12. Ellinger-Ziegelbauer, H., Stuart, B., Wahle, B., Bomann, W., and Ahr, H. J. 2005. Comparison of the expression profiles induced by genotoxic and nongenotoxic carcinogens in rat liver. Mutat. Res. 575:61-84.
13. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals. 2004. Targeted risk assessment. ECETOC Technical Report No 98. Brussels, Belgium: ECETOC.
14. Holsapple, M. P., Pitot, H. C., Cohen, S. H., Boobis, A. R., Klaunig, J. E., Pastoor, T., Dellarco, V. L., and Dragan, Y. P. 2006. Mode of action in relevance of rodent liver tumors to human cancer risk. Toxicol. Sci. 89:51-56.
15. Hughes, K., Paterson, J., and Meek, M. E. 2009. Tools for the prioritization of substances on the Domestic Substances List in Canada on the basis of hazard. Regul. Toxicol Pharmacol. 55:382-393.
16. Klaunig, J., Babich, M. A., Baetcke, K. P., Cook, J. C., Corton, J. C., David, R. M., DeLuca, J. G., Lai, D. Y., McKee, R. H., Peters, J. M., Roberts, R. A., and Fenner-Crisp, P. A. 2003. PPARa agonist-induced rodent tumors: Mode(s) of action and human relevance. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 33:655-780.
17. Kroes, R., Kleiner, J., and Renwick, A. 2005.. The threshold of toxicological concern concept in risk assessment. Toxicol. Sci. 86:226-230.
18. Meek, M. E., and Armstrong, V. C. 2007. The assessment and management of industrial chemicals in Canada. In Risk assessment of chemicals, K. Van Leeuwen and T. Vermeire, pp. 591-615. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
19. Meek, M. E., Bucher, J. R., Cohen, S. M., Dellarco, V., Hill, R. N., Lehman-McKeeman, L. D., Longfellow, D. G., Pastoor, T., Seed, J., and Patton, D. E. 2003. A framework for human relevance analysis of information on carcinogenic modes of action. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 33:591-653.
20. Munro, I. C., Renwick, A G., and Danielewska-Nikiela, B. 2008. The threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) in risk assessment. Toxicol. Lett. 180:151-156.
21. National Research Council. 2007. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: A vision and a strategy. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. http://www.nap.edu/clog.php?record- id=11970#toc
22. National Research Council. 2009. Science and decisions: Advancing risk assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. http://www.nap.edu/ catalog.php? record-id=12209#toc
23. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 1994. US EPA/EC joint project on the evaluation of (quantitative) structure activity relationships. OECD Environment Monographs No. 88. Paris: OECD. http:// www.oecd.orgdocument300,2340,en-2649- 34365-1916638-1- 1-1-1,00.html, accessed 1 June 2006.
24. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2004. The principles for establishing the status of development and validation of (quantitative) structure-activity relationships [(Q)SARs]. Meeting document for the second meeting of the Expert Group on (Q)SARs, September 2004, OECD, Paris, France. ENV/JM/TG(2004)27; 8 July 2004.
25. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2004. The report from the Expert Group On (Quantitative) Structure-Activity Relationships [(Q)SARs] on the principles for the validation of (Q)SARs. Series on Testing and Assessment no. 49. ENV/JM/ MONO(2004)24. December. http://www. oecd.org/dataoecd/33/37/37849783.pdf
26. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2004. Chemical testing guidelines for endocrine disruptors: Conceptual framework. January. http://www.oecd.org/ document580,3343,en-2649-34377-2348 794-1-1-1-1,00.html
27. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2006. Report on the regulatory uses and applications in OECD member countries of (Q)SAR models in the assessment of new and existing chemicals. OECD Environment Health and Safety Publications. Series on Testing and Assessment no. 58. ENV/JM/ MONO(2006)25; avaiable at http://www. oecd.org/dataoecd/55/22/38131728.pdf
28. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2007a. Guidance document on the validation of (quantitative) structureactivity relationships [(Q)SAR] models. OECD Environment Health and Safety Publications. Series on Testing and Assessment, no. 69. ENV/JM/MONO(2007) 2; available at http:// www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2007doc.nsf/LinkTo/ NT00000D92/$FILE/JT03224782. pdf
29. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2007b. Guidance on grouping of chemicals. OECD Environment Health and Safety Publications. Series on Testing and Assessment,no. 80. http://www.olis.oecd.org/ olis2007doc. nsfLinkToNT0000426A$FILEJT0 3232745.PDF,accessed January 20, 2010.
30. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2008 Workshop on Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment. Series on Testing and Assessment No. 88. ENVJMMONO( 2008(10) .27 May. http://www. oecd.org/dataoecd45/ 52/40705314.pdf
31. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2009. Report of the expert consultation to evaluate an estrogen receptor binding affinity model for hazard identification. Task Force on Hazard Assessment. ENV/JM/MONO(2009)33; available at http:// www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2009doc.nsf/linkto/ env-jm-mono(2009)33.
32. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2009. Report of the workshop on structural alerts for the OECD (Q)SAR Application Toolbox. Series on Testing and Assessment, no.101. February. ENV/JM/ MONO(2009)4. http://www.olis.oecd.org/ olis/2009doc.nsf/linkto/env-jmmono(2009)4
33. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2010. The OECD (Q)SAR Application Toolbox. ENV/JM/MONO(2008)10. http://www.oecd.org/document54/ 0,3343,en- 2649-34379-42923638-1-1-1-1,00.html and http://www.oecd. orgdataoecd45/52/ 40705314.pdf, accessed January 20, 2010.
34. Pastoor, T., Rose, P., Lloyd, S., Peffer, R., and Green, T. 2005. Case study: Weight of evidence evaluation of the human health relevance of thiamethoxam-related mouse liver tumors. Toxicol. Sci. 86:56-60.
35. Peffer, R. C., Moggs, J. G., Pastoor, T., Currie, R. A., Wright, J., Milburn, G., Waechter, F., and Rusyn, I. 2007. Mouse liver effects of cyproconazole, a triazole fungicide: Role of the constitutive androstane receptor. Toxicol. Sci. 99:315-325.
36. Schmieder, P. K., Tapper, M. A., Denny, J. S., Kolanczyk, R. C., Sheedy, B. R., Henry, T. R., and Veith, G. D. 2004. Use of trout liver slices to enhance mechanistic interpretation of estrogen receptor binding for cost-effective prioritization of chemicals within large inventories. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38:6333-6342.
37. Seed, J., Carney, E. W., Corley, R. A., Crofton, K. M., DeSesso, J. M., Foster, P. M., Kavlock, R., Kimmel, G., Klaunig, J., Meek, M. E., Preston, R. J., Slikker, W., Jr., Tabacova, S., Williams, G. M., Wiltse, J., Zoeller, R. T., Fenner-Crisp, P., and Patton, D. E. 2005. Using mode of action and life stage information to evaluate the human relevance of animal toxicity data. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 35:663-771.
38. Sonich-Mullin, C., Fielder, R., Wiltse, J., Baetcke, K., Dempsey, J., Fenner-Crisp, P., Grant, D., Hartley, M., Knaap, A., Kroese, D., Mangelsdorf, I., Meek, E., Rice, J. M., and Younes, M. 2001. IPCS conceptual framework for evaluating a MOA for chemical carcinogenesis. Regul. Toxicol Pharmacol. 34:146-152.
39. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Guidance on cumulative risk assessment. Part 1. Planning and scoping. Science Policy Council, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. July. http:// www.epa.gov/osa/spc/pdfscumrisk2.pdf
40. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment (Published on May 14, 1998, Federal Register 63(93):26846-26924). Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC. http://www.epa. gov/raf/publications/pdfs/ECOTXTBX.PDF
41. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998a. Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC) final report: Chapter 4: Priority setting. August. http://www. epa.gov/scipoly/oscpendo/pubs/ edspoverview/ finalrpt.htm
42. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Review of the EPA's proposed environmental EDSP. July. http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/ sabproduct.nsf/ C8ABD410E357DBCF8525 7193004C42C4/$File/ec13.pdf
43. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002a. TSCA new chemicals program (NCP) new chemicals categories. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC. http:// www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/ pubs/cat02.pdf
44. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002b. The occurrence of disinfection by-products (DBPs) of health concern in drinking water: Results of a nationwide DBP occurrence study. EPA/600/R-02/068, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, Athens, GA.
45. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Framework for cumulative risk assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC. EPA/630/P-02/001F. http:// www.epa. gov/raf/publications/pdfs/ frmwrk-cum-risk- assmnt.pdf
46. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005a. OncoLogic user's manual: An expert system for prediction of the carcinogenic potential of chemicals, Ver. 6.0. March. http://www. epa.gov/oppt/sf/pubs/onco-user-man.pdf
47. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005b. Wildlife research strategy. EPA/600/R-04/ 050. National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. http://www.epa.gov/osp/bosc/ pdf/WildResStrat.pdf
48. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005c. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP): Federal Registry Notice (FRN): Chemical selection approach for initial screening. Vol.70, No. 186. September. 56449-56465. http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2005/ September/Day-27/t19260.pdf
49. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009a. Ecologicial structure activity relationships (ECOSAR),v. 1.00a, February. http://www.epa.gov/oppt/ newchems/tools/ 21ecosar.htm
50. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009b. Assessment tools for the evaluation of risk (ASTER) user guide: ASTER system, Version 2.0. http:/www.epa.gov/aster
51. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009c. Analog identification methodology (AIM), Version 1.00. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC. http://www. epa.gov/oppt/sf/tools/aim.htm
52. Woo, Y.-T, Lai, D., McLain, J. L., Manibusan, M. K., and Dellarco, V. 2002. Use of mechanism-based structure-activity relationship analysis in carcinogenic potential ranking for drinking water disinfection by-products. Environ Health Perspect. 110(suppl. 1):75-87.