Is the 90-day dog study necessary for pesticide toxicity testing?

When registering a new pesticide, 90-day oral toxicity studies performed with both rodent and non-rodent species, typically rats and dogs, are part of a standard battery of animal tests required in most countries for human health risk assessment (RA). This analysis set out to determine the need for the 90-day dog study in RA by reviewing data from 195 pesticides evaluated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) from 1998 through 2021. The dog study was used in RA for only 42 pesticides, mostly to set the point of departure (POD) for shorter-term non-dietary pesticide exposures. Dog no-observed-adverse-effect-levels (NOAELs) were lower than rat NOAELs in 90-day studies for 36 of the above 42 pesticides, suggesting that the dog was the more sensitive species. However, lower NOAELs may not necessarily correspond to greater sensitivity as factors such as dose spacing and/or allometric scaling need to be considered. Normalizing doses between rats and dogs explained the lower NOAELs in 22/36 pesticides, indicating that in those cases the dog was not more sensitive, and the comparable rat study could have been used instead for RA. For five of the remaining pesticides, other studies of appropriate duration besides the 90-day rat study were available that would have offered a similar level of protection if used to set PODs. In only nine cases could no alternative be found in the pesticide's database to use in place of the 90-day dog study for setting safe exposure levels or to identify unique hazards. The present analysis demonstrates that for most pesticide risk determinations the 90-day dog study provided no benefit beyond the rat or other available data.

A new approach to the classification of carcinogenicity.

Concern over substances that may cause cancer has led to various classification schemes to recognize carcinogenic threats and provide a basis to manage those threats. The least useful schemes have a binary choice that declares a substance carcinogenic or not. This overly simplistic approach ignores the complexity of cancer causation by considering neither how the substance causes cancer, nor the potency of that mode of action. Consequently, substances are classified simply as "carcinogenic", compromising the opportunity to properly manage these kinds of substances. It will likely be very difficult, if not impossible, to incorporate New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) into binary schemes. In this paper we propose a new approach cancer classification scheme that segregates substances by both mode of action and potency into three categories and, as a consequence, provides useful guidance in the regulation and management of substances with carcinogenic potential. Examples are given, including aflatoxin (category A), trichlorethylene (category B), and titanium dioxide (category C), which demonstrate the clear differentiation among these substances that generate appropriate levels of concern and management options.

The codification of hazard and its impact on the hazard versus risk controversy.

The long running controversy about the relative merits of hazard-based versus risk-based approaches has been investigated. There are three levels of hazard codification: level 1 divides chemicals into dichotomous bands of hazardous and non-hazardous; level 2 divides chemicals into bands of hazard based on severity and/or potency; and level 3 places each chemical on a continuum of hazard based on severity and/or potency. Any system which imposes compartments onto a continuum will give rise to issues at the boundaries, especially with only two compartments. Level 1 schemes are only justifiable if there is no variation in severity, or potency or if there is no threshold. This is the assumption implicit in GHS/EU classification for carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity and mutagenicity. However, this assumption has been challenged. Codification level 2 hazard assessments offer a range of choices and reduce the built-in conflict inherent in the level 1 process. Level 3 assessments allow a full range of choices between the extremes and reduce the built-in conflict even more. The underlying reason for the controversy between hazard and risk is the use of level 1 hazard codification schemes in situations where there are ranges of severity and potency which require the use of level 2 or level 3 hazard codification. There is not a major difference between level 2 and level 3 codification, and they can both be used to select appropriate risk management options. Existing level 1 codification schemes should be reviewed and developed into level 2 schemes where appropriate.

Chemical carcinogenicity revisited 1: A unified theory of carcinogenicity based on contemporary knowledge.

Developments in the understanding of the etiology of cancer have profound implications for the way the carcinogenicity of chemicals is addressed. This paper proposes a unified theory of carcinogenesis that will illuminate better ways to evaluate and regulate chemicals. In the last four decades, we have come to understand that for a cell and a group of cells to begin the process of unrestrained growth that is defined as cancer, there must be changes in DNA that reprogram the cell from normal to abnormal. Cancer is the consequence of DNA coding errors that arise either directly from mutagenic events or indirectly from cell proliferation especially if sustained. Chemicals that act via direct interaction with DNA can induce cancer because they cause mutations which can be carried forward in dividing cells. Chemicals that act via non-genotoxic mechanisms must be dosed to maintain a proliferative environment so that the steps toward neoplasia have time to occur. Chemicals that induce increased cellular proliferation can be divided into two categories: those which act by a cellular receptor to induce cellular proliferation, and those which act via non-specific mechanisms such as cytotoxicity. This knowledge has implications for testing chemicals for carcinogenic potential and risk management.

Chemical carcinogenicity revisited 3: Risk assessment of carcinogenic potential based on the current state of knowledge of carcinogenesis in humans.

Over 50 years, we have learned a great deal about the biology that underpins cancer but our approach to testing chemicals for carcinogenic potential has not kept up. Only a small number of chemicals has been tested in animal-intensive, time consuming, and expensive long-term bioassays in rodents. We now recommend a transition from the bioassay to a decision-tree matrix that can be applied to a broader range of chemicals, with better predictivity, based on the premise that cancer is the consequence of DNA coding errors that arise either directly from mutagenic events or indirectly from sustained cell proliferation. The first step is in silico and in vitro assessment for mutagenic (DNA reactive) activity. If mutagenic, it is assumed to be carcinogenic unless evidence indicates otherwise. If the chemical does not show mutagenic potential, the next step is assessment of potential human exposure compared to the threshold for toxicological concern (TTC). If potential human exposure exceeds the TTC, then testing is done to look for effects associated with the key characteristics that are precursors to the carcinogenic process, such as increased cell proliferation, immunosuppression, or significant estrogenic activity. Protection of human health is achieved by limiting exposures to below NOEALs for these precursor effects. The decision tree matrix is animal-sparing, cost effective, and in step with our growing knowledge of the process of cancer formation.

Classification schemes for carcinogenicity based on hazard-identification have become outmoded and serve neither science nor society.

Classification schemes for carcinogenicity based solely on hazard-identification such as the IARC monograph process and the UN system adopted in the EU have become outmoded. They are based on a concept developed in the 1970s that chemicals could be divided into two classes: carcinogens and non-carcinogens. Categorization in this way places into the same category chemicals and agents with widely differing potencies and modes of action. This is how eating processed meat can fall into the same category as sulfur mustard gas. Approaches based on hazard and risk characterization present an integrated and balanced picture of hazard, dose response and exposure and allow informed risk management decisions to be taken. Because a risk-based decision framework fully considers hazard in the context of dose, potency, and exposure the unintended downsides of a hazard only approach are avoided, e.g., health scares, unnecessary economic costs, loss of beneficial products, adoption of strategies with greater health costs, and the diversion of public funds into unnecessary research. An initiative to agree upon a standardized, internationally acceptable methodology for carcinogen assessment is needed now. The approach should incorporate principles and concepts of existing international consensus-based frameworks including the WHO IPCS mode of action framework.

Key Elements for Judging the Quality of a Risk Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Many reports have been published that contain recommendations for improving the quality, transparency, and usefulness of decision making for risk assessments prepared by agencies of the U.S. federal government. A substantial measure of consensus has emerged regarding the characteristics that high-quality assessments should possess. OBJECTIVE: The goal was to summarize the key characteristics of a high-quality assessment as identified in the consensus-building process and to integrate them into a guide for use by decision makers, risk assessors, peer reviewers and other interested stakeholders to determine if an assessment meets the criteria for high quality. DISCUSSION: Most of the features cited in the guide are applicable to any type of assessment, whether it encompasses one, two, or all four phases of the risk-assessment paradigm; whether it is qualitative or quantitative; and whether it is screening level or highly sophisticated and complex. Other features are tailored to specific elements of an assessment. Just as agencies at all levels of government are responsible for determining the effectiveness of their programs, so too should they determine the effectiveness of their assessments used in support of their regulatory decisions. Furthermore, if a nongovernmental entity wishes to have its assessments considered in the governmental regulatory decision-making process, then these assessments should be judged in the same rigorous manner and be held to similar standards. CONCLUSIONS: The key characteristics of a high-quality assessment can be summarized and integrated into a guide for judging whether an assessment possesses the desired features of high quality, transparency, and usefulness. CITATION: Fenner-Crisp PA, Dellarco VL. 2016. Key elements for judging the quality of a risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 124:1127-1135; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1510483.

A retrospective analysis of toxicity studies in dogs and impact on the chronic reference dose for conventional pesticide chemicals.

Prior to October 2007, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) required both 13-week and 1-year studies in Beagle dogs be submitted in support of registration for pesticides. Following an extensive retrospective analysis, we (the authors) determined that the 1-year toxicity dog study should be eliminated as a requirement for pesticide registration. The present work presents this retrospective analysis of results from 13-week and 1-year dog studies for 110 conventional pesticide chemicals, representing more than 50 classes of pesticides. The data were evaluated to determine if the 13-week dog study, in addition to the long-term studies in two rodent species (mice and rats), were sufficient for the identification of no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) and lowest observed adverse effect levels (LOAELs) for the derivation of chronic reference doses (RfD). Only pesticides with adequate 13-week and 1-year duration studies were included in the present evaluation. Toxicity endpoints and dose-response data from 13-week and 1-year studies were compared. The analysis showed that 70 of the 110 pesticides had similar critical effects regardless of duration and had NOAELs and LOAELs within a difference of 1.5-fold of each other. For the remaining 40 pesticides, 31 had lower NOAELs and LOAELs in the 1-year study, primarily due to dose selection and spacing. In only 2% of the cases were additional toxic effects identified in the 1-year study that were not observed in the 13-week study and/or in the rodent studies. In 8% of the cases, the 1-year dog had a lower NOAEL and/or LOAEL than the 13-week study, but there would have been no regulatory impact if the 1-year dog study had not been performed because adequate data were available from the other required studies. A dog toxicity study beyond 13-weeks does not have significant impact on the derivation of a chronic RfD for pesticide risk assessment.

Hemangiosarcoma in rodents: mode-of-action evaluation and human relevance.

Although rarely occurring in humans, hemangiosarcomas (HS) have become important in evaluating the potential human risk of several chemicals, including industrial, agricultural, and pharmaceutical agents. Spontaneous HS arise frequently in mice, less commonly in rats, and frequently in numerous breeds of dogs. This review explores knowledge gaps and uncertainties related to the mode of action (MOA) for the induction of HS in rodents, and evaluates the potential relevance for human risk. For genotoxic chemicals (vinyl chloride and thorotrast), significant information is available concerning the MOA. In contrast, numerous chemicals produce HS in rodents by nongenotoxic, proliferative mechanisms. An overall framework is presented, including direct and indirect actions on endothelial cells, paracrine effects in local tissues, activation of bone marrow endothelial precursor cells, and tissue hypoxia. Numerous obstacles are identified in investigations into the MOA for mouse HS and the relevance of the mouse tumors to humans, including lack of identifiable precursor lesions, usually late occurrence of the tumors, and complexities of endothelial biology. This review proposes a working MOA for HS induced by nongenotoxic compounds that can guide future research in this area. Importantly, a common MOA appears to exist for the nongenotoxic induction of HS, where there appears to be a convergence of multiple initiating events (e.g., hemolysis, decreased respiration, adipocyte growth) leading to either dysregulated angiogenesis and/or erythropoiesis that results from hypoxia and macrophage activation. These later events lead to the release of angiogenic growth factors and cytokines that stimulate endothelial cell proliferation, which, if sustained, provide the milieu that can lead to HS formation.

Thiazopyr and thyroid disruption: case study within the context of the 2006 IPCS Human Relevance Framework for analysis of a cancer mode of action.

Thiazopyr increases the incidence of male rat thyroid follicular-cell tumors; however, it is not carcinogenic in mice. Thiazopyr is not genotoxic. Thiazopyr exerts its carcinogenic effect on the rat thyroid gland secondary to enhanced metabolism of thyroxin leading to hormone imbalance. The relevance of these rat tumors to human health was assessed by using the 2006 IPCS Human Relevance Framework. The postulated rodent tumor mode of action was tested against the Bradford Hill criteria and was found to satisfy the conditions of dose and temporal concordance, biological plausibility, coherence, strength, consistency, and specificity that fits with a well-established mode of action for thyroid follicular-cell tumors. Although the postulated mode of action could theoretically operate in humans, marked quantitative differences in the inherent susceptibility for neoplasia to thyroid hormone imbalance in rats allows for the conclusion that thiazopyr does not pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans.

Agricultural chemical safety assessment: A multisector approach to the modernization of human safety requirements.

Better understanding of toxicological mechanisms, enhanced testing capabilities, and demands for more sophisticated data for safety and health risk assessment have generated international interest in improving the current testing paradigm for agricultural chemicals. To address this need, the ILSI Health and Environmental Sciences Institute convened a large and diverse group of international experts to develop a credible and viable testing approach that includes scientifically appropriate studies that are necessary without being redundant, and that emphasize toxicological endpoints and exposure durations that are relevant for risk assessment. Benefits of the proposed approach include improved data for risk assessment, greater efficiency, use of fewer animals, and better use of resources. From the outset of this endeavor, it was unanimously agreed that a tiered approach should be designed to incorporate existing knowledge on the chemistry, toxicology, and actual human exposure scenarios of the compound, with integration of studies on metabolism/kinetics, life stages, and systemic toxicities. Three international task forces were charged with designing study types and endpoints on metabolism/kinetics, life stages, and systemic toxicities to be used in the tiered approach. This tiered testing proposal departs from the current standardized list of hazard studies used by many national authorities, and represents the first comprehensive effort of its kind to scientifically redesign the testing framework for agricultural chemicals.

Mode of action in relevance of rodent liver tumors to human cancer risk.

Hazard identification and risk assessment paradigms depend on the presumption of the similarity of rodents to humans, yet species specific responses, and the extrapolation of high-dose effects to low-dose exposures can affect the estimation of human risk from rodent data. As a consequence, a human relevance framework concept was developed by the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) and International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Risk Science Institute (RSI) with the central tenet being the identification of a mode of action (MOA). To perform a MOA analysis, the key biochemical, cellular, and molecular events need to first be established, and the temporal and dose-dependent concordance of each of the key events in the MOA can then be determined. The key events can be used to bridge species and dose for a given MOA. The next step in the MOA analysis is the assessment of biological plausibility for determining the relevance of the specified MOA in an animal model for human cancer risk based on kinetic and dynamic parameters. Using the framework approach, a MOA in animals could not be defined for metal overload. The MOA for phenobarbital (PB)-like P450 inducers was determined to be unlikely in humans after kinetic and dynamic factors were considered. In contrast, after these factors were considered with reference to estrogen, the conclusion was drawn that estrogen-induced tumors were plausible in humans. Finally, it was concluded that the induction of rodent liver tumors by porphyrogenic compounds followed a cytotoxic MOA, and that liver tumors formed as a result of sustained cytotoxicity and regenerative proliferation are considered relevant for evaluating human cancer risk if appropriate metabolism occurs in the animal models and in humans.

Food safety: risk assessment methodology and decision-making criteria.

As our scientific technology grows, risk assessment methods become more complex and, therefore, open to greater scientific debate. Risk assessment has always been a part of the regulatory notification and approval process for foods. However, the methodologies applied to risk assessment and decision-making have become diverse, dependent on a number of features, including the areas of the world in which one operates, the need to use cumulative risk assessment for pesticides and other ingredients or alternative risk assessment considerations for evaluating nontraditional or bioengineered foods. Diverse institutional structures within a single federal regulatory authority may tend to lead to diversity in risk outcomes that creates policy decisions that complicate and confuse the risk management process. On top of this challenge, decisions become more complicated by the need to examine beneficial factors of foods rather than the adverse effects of foods and food additives. Foods are a complex mixture of ingredients. Regulatory groups recognize the need to use new approaches for evaluating the safety and risks associated with foods and food additives, and to do so in a timely manner. The United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) in its need to ensure standards of "reasonable certainty of no harm" continues to explore alternative means to be responsive to petitioners as well as continue to examine scientifically validated means, e.g., quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR), and computer-assisted programs, within the approval process to assist in the evaluation of risks. Another means to improve the risk management process would include the cumulative risk assessment of pesticides that will, no doubt, be the beginning of more intensive efforts to understand cumulative exposures and the inherent risks from multiple pathways of exposure. The passage of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) resulted in developing additional risk assessment methodologies and approaches to assess the potential for multiple exposures and risks. Addressing the international criteria used in decision-making related to foods safety assessment has resulted in acceptable intake values for food ingredients for carcinogens and noncarcinogens that, in general, tend to be more stringent in the United States compared to Europe. Clearly, the need for harmonization of risk assessment criteria and the impact of the decision process on regulatory approvals and safety assessment is a future need for the continued assurances of food safety. The topics presented in this paper are based on a symposium held in November 2002 at the annual meeting of the American College of Toxicology.