Bridging the gap between academic research and regulatory health risk assessment of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals

Current Opinion in Pharmacology

Volumn 19, Issue , 2014, Pages 99-104

  Beronius, Anna ^a   Hanberg, Annika ^b   Zilliacus, Johanna ^b   Rudén, Christina ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENDOCRINE DISRUPTOR;

ACADEMIC RESEARCH; CLINICAL RESEARCH; HEALTH HAZARD; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLICATION; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK REDUCTION; SAMPLE SIZE; STUDY DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; VALIDATION PROCESS; ANIMAL; DECISION MAKING; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; METHODOLOGY;

ANIMALS; DECISION MAKING; ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84907225820     PISSN: 14714892     EISSN: 14714973     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.coph.2014.08.005     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) Evaluation under REACH, Progress Report 2013 2012 Available online at: echa.europa.eu
2. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Guidance of EFSA Application of systematic review methodology to food and feed safety assessments to support decision making EFSA J 8 2010 90
3. US National Research Council of the National Academies review of EPA's integrated risk information system (IRIS) process 2014 The National Academies Press Washington D.C.
4. Organisation for Economic Co-operation Development (OECD) Manual for the assessment of chemicals. Chapter 3: Data evaluation 2005 Available online at www.oecd.org/
5. United Stated Environmental Protection Agency Framework for Human Health Risk Assessment to Inform Decision Making 2014 Available online at: www.epa.gov/
6. A. Kortenkamp, O. Martin, M. Faust, R. Evans, R. McKinlay, F. Orton, and E. Rosivatz State of the Art Assessment of Endocrine Disrupters - Final Report Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/endocrine/pdf/sotaedcfinalreport.pdf 2012
7. J.P. Myers, F.S. vom Saal, B.T. Akingbemi, K. Arizono, S. Belcher, T. Colborn, I. Chahoud, D.A. Crain, F. Farabollini, and L.J. Guillette Jr. Why public health agencies cannot depend on good laboratory practices as a criterion for selecting data: the case of bisphenol A Environ Health Perspect 117 2009 309 315
8. United Nations Environment Programme the World Health Organization State of the science of endocrine disrupting chemicals - 2013 2012 Available online at: http://www.who.int/ceh/publications/endocrine/en/
9. R.T. Zoeller, T.R. Brown, L.L. Doan, A.C. Gore, N.E. Skakkebaek, A.M. Soto, T.J. Woodruff, and F.S. Vom Saal Endocrine-disrupting chemicals and public health protection: a statement of principles from The Endocrine Society Endocrinology 153 2012 4097 4110
10. European Food Safety Authority Scientific opinion on the hazard assessment of endocrine disruptors: Scientific criteria for identification of endocrine disruptors and appropriateness of existing test methods for assessing effects mediated by these substances on human health and the environment 2013. 2013 Available online at: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/pdf/3132
11. T.T. Schug, R. Abagyan, B. Blumberg, T.J. Collins, D. Crews, P.L. DeFleur, S.M. Dickerson, T.M. Edwards, A.C. Gore, and L.J. Guillette Designing endocrine disruption out of the next generation of chemicals Green Chem 15 2013 181 198
12. European Environment Agency The impacts of endocrine disrupters on wildlife, people and their environments. The Weybridge +15 (1996-2011) report 2012 Available online at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/the-impacts-of-endocrine-disrupters
13. E.U. Parliament: MEPs call for clampdown on chemicals affecting hormones Press release 14 March 2013 Available on-line at www.europarl.europa.eu/
14. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Detailed Review Paper on the State of the Science on novel in vitro and in vivo screening and testing methods and endpoints for evaluating endocrine disruptors. Series on Testing & Assessment No. 178. 2012:. Available online at: http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/seriesontestingandassessmenttestingforendocrinedisrupters.htm.
15. D.R. Juberg, S.J. Borghoff, R.A. Becker, W. Casey, T. Hartung, M.P. Holsapple, M.S. Marty, E.M. Mihaich, G. Van Der Kraak, and M.G. Wade t4 workshop report - lessons learned, challenges, and opportunities: the U.S. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program ALTEX 31 2014 63 78
16. A. Beronius, N. Johansson, C. Ruden, and A. Hanberg The influence of study design and sex-differences on results from developmental neurotoxicity studies of bisphenol A, implications for toxicity testing Toxicology 311 2013 13 26
17. T.T. Schug, J.J. Heindel, L. Camacho, K.B. Delclos, P. Howard, A.F. Johnson, J. Aungst, D. Keefe, R. Newbold, and N.J. Walker A new approach to synergize academic and guideline-compliant research: the CLARITY-BPA research program Reprod Toxicol 40 2013 35 40
18. R.E. Alcock, B.H. Macgillivray, and J.S. Busby Understanding the mismatch between the demands of risk assessment and practice of scientists - the case of Deca-BDE Environ Int 37 2011 216 225
19. J.G. Hengstler, H. Foth, T. Gebel, P.J. Kramer, W. Lilienblum, H. Schweinfurth, W. Volkel, K.M. Wollin, and U. Gundert-Remy Critical evaluation of key evidence on the human health hazards of exposure to bisphenol A Crit Rev Toxicol 41 2011 263 291
20. C.A. Harris, A.P. Scott, A.C. Johnson, G.H. Panter, D. Sheahan, M. Roberts, and J.P. Sumpter Principles of sound ecotoxicology Environ Sci Technol 48 2014 3100 3111
21. Nature Editorial Announcement: reducing our irreproducibility Nature 496 2013 398
22. M. Batke, T. Aldenberg, S. Escher, and I. Mangelsdorf Relevance of non-guideline studies for risk assessment: the coverage model based on most frequent targets in repeated dose toxicity studies Toxicol Lett 218 2013 293 298
23. National Research Council Review of EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Process 2014 The National Academies Press Washington DC
24. P.L. Bishop, and C.E. Willett The use and acceptance of Other Scientifically Relevant Information (OSRI) in the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 101 2014 3 22
25. E. Silbergeld, and R.W. Scherer Evidence-based toxicology: strait is the gate, but the road is worth taking ALTEX 30 2013 67 73
26. L.S. Birnbaum, K.A. Thayer, J.R. Bucher, and M.S. Wolfe Implementing systematic review at the National Toxicology Program: status and next steps Environ Health Perspect 121 2013 A108 A109
27. L.S. McCarty, C.J. Borgert, and E.M. Mihaich Information quality in regulatory decision making: peer review versus good laboratory practice Environ Health Perspect 120 2012 927 934
28. A. Beronius, C. Rudén, H. Håkansson, and A. Hanberg Risk to all or none?. A comparative analysis of controversies in the health risk assessment of Bisphenol A Reprod Toxicol 29 2010 132 146
29. Scientific Committee on Emerging Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR): Memorandum on the use of the scientific literature for human health risk assessment purposes - weighing of evidence and expression of uncertainty 2012 Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientificcommittees/emerging/docs/scenihrs001.pdf
30. A.A. Rooney, A.L. Boyles, M.S. Wolfe, J.R. Bucher, and K.A. Thayer Systematic review and evidence integration for literature-based environmental health science assessment Environ Health Perspect 2014 Epub ahead of print
31. T.J. Woodruff, and P. Sutton An evidence-based medicine methodology to bridge the gap between clinical and environmental health sciences Health Aff (Millwood) 30 2011 931 937
32. A. Beronius, L. Molander, C. Ruden, and A. Hanberg Facilitating the use of non-standard in vivo studies in health risk assessment of chemicals: a proposal to improve evaluation criteria and reporting J Appl Toxicol 34 2014 607 617
33. L. Maxim, and J.P. van der Sluijs Qualichem in vivo: a tool for assessing the quality of in vivo studies and its application for bisphenol a PLoS One 9 2014 e88773
34. C.R. Hooijmans, M.M. Rovers, R.B. de Vries, M. Leenaars, M. Ritskes-Hoitinga, and M.W. Langendam SYRCLE's risk of bias tool for animal studies BMC Med Res Methodol 14 2014 43
35. K. Schneider, M. Schwarz, I. Burkholder, A. Kopp-Schneider, L. Edler, A. Kinsner-Ovaskainen, T. Hartung, and S. Hoffmann ToxRTool, a new tool to assess the reliability of toxicological data Toxicol Lett 189 2009 138 144
36. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.4: Evaluation of available information 2011 Available on-line at: echa.europa.eu
37. L.N. Vandenberg, T. Colborn, T.B. Hayes, J.J. Heindel, D.R. Jacobs Jr., D.H. Lee, T. Shioda, A.M. Soto, F.S. Vom Saal, and W.V. Welshons Hormones and endocrine-disrupting chemicals: low-dose effects and nonmonotonic dose responses Endocr Rev 33 2012 378 455
38. R. Morris Reporting standards: rigid guidelines may restrict research Nature 491 2012 192
39. C. Kilkenny, W.J. Browne, I.C. Cuthill, M. Emerson, and D.G. Altman Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research PLoS Biol 8 2010 e1000412
40. I. Simera, D. Moher, A. Hirst, J. Hoey, K.F. Schulz, and D.G. Altman Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network BMC Med 8 2010 24
41. M. Ågerstrand, L. Edvardsson, and C. Rudén Bad reporting or Bad Science? Systematic Data Evaluation as a Means to Improve the Use of Peer-Reviewed Studies in Risk Assessments of Chemicals Hum Ecol Risk Assessment: Int J 20 2014 1427 1445
42. S.C. Landis, S.G. Amara, K. Asadullah, C.P. Austin, R. Blumenstein, E.W. Bradley, R.G. Crystal, R.B. Darnell, R.J. Ferrante, and H. Fillit A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research Nature 490 2012 187 191
43. H.A. Tilson, and J.C. Schroeder Reporting of results from animal studies Environ Health Perspect 121 2013 A320 A321
44. US National Research Council of the National Academies Guidance for the Description of Animal Research in Scientific Publications 2011 National Research Council (US) Institute for Laboratory Animal Research Washington, DC