Uterine adenocarcinoma in the rat induced by afidopyropen. An analysis of the lesion's induction, progression and its relevance to humans.

Afidopyropen is a novel insecticide that acts as a TRPV channel modulator in chordotonal organs of target insects. In two carcinogenicity studies with Fischer rats, an increased incidence of uterine adenocarcinomas was observed at 1000 and 3000 ppm. This finding prompted an investigation of the mechanism of the tumor formation as well as the relevance of this mechanism to humans. The mechanistic work took parallel paths: one path investigated the pharmacokinetic properties of the test substance at the doses where the tumors were found; while the second path examined the key mechanistic events that culminated in uterine adenocarcinomas. The results of the investigation indicated that the tumors only occurred at doses where excretion of test substance was saturated - indicating that homeostatic biological and/or physiological processes were overwhelmed. At the doses where these processes were overwhelmed, the test substance acted through a mechanism of dopamine agonism, triggering a cascade key events that resulted in uterine adenocarcinomas. An analysis of these mechanisms observed in rat showed that they are both quantitatively (pharmacokinetic mechanism) and qualitatively (dopamine agonism mechanism) not relevant to humans. Therefore the uterine adenocarcinomas observed in the rat associated with high doses of Afidopyropen are not expected to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans.

GHS additivity formula: can it predict the acute systemic toxicity of agrochemical formulations that contain acutely toxic ingredients?

In vivo acute systemic testing is a regulatory requirement for agrochemical formulations. GHS specifies an alternative computational approach (GHS additivity formula) for calculating the acute toxicity of mixtures. We collected acute systemic toxicity data from formulations that contained one of several acutely-toxic active ingredients. The resulting acute data set includes 210 formulations tested for oral toxicity, 128 formulations tested for inhalation toxicity and 31 formulations tested for dermal toxicity. The GHS additivity formula was applied to each of these formulations and compared with the experimental in vivo result. In the acute oral assay, the GHS additivity formula misclassified 110 formulations using the GHS classification criteria (48% accuracy) and 119 formulations using the USEPA classification criteria (43% accuracy). With acute inhalation, the GHS additivity formula misclassified 50 formulations using the GHS classification criteria (61% accuracy) and 34 formulations using the USEPA classification criteria (73% accuracy). For acute dermal toxicity, the GHS additivity formula misclassified 16 formulations using the GHS classification criteria (48% accuracy) and 20 formulations using the USEPA classification criteria (36% accuracy). This data indicates the acute systemic toxicity of many formulations is not the sum of the ingredients' toxicity (additivity); but rather, ingredients in a formulation can interact to result in lower or higher toxicity than predicted by the GHS additivity formula.

Toward Good Read-Across Practice (GRAP) guidance.

Grouping of substances and utilizing read-across of data within those groups represents an important data gap filling technique for chemical safety assessments. Categories/analogue groups are typically developed based on structural similarity and, increasingly often, also on mechanistic (biological) similarity. While read-across can play a key role in complying with legislations such as the European REACH regulation, the lack of consensus regarding the extent and type of evidence necessary to support it often hampers its successful application and acceptance by regulatory authorities. Despite a potentially broad user community, expertise is still concentrated across a handful of organizations and individuals. In order to facilitate the effective use of read-across, this document aims to summarize the state-of-the-art, summarizes insights learned from reviewing ECHA published decisions as far as the relative successes/pitfalls surrounding read-across under REACH and compile the relevant activities and guidance documents. Special emphasis is given to the available existing tools and approaches, an analysis of ECHA's published final decisions associated with all levels of compliance checks and testing proposals, the consideration and expression of uncertainty, the use of biological support data and the impact of the ECHA Read-Across Assessment Framework (RAAF) published in 2015.

Retrospective evaluation of the impact of functional immunotoxicity testing on pesticide hazard identification and risk assessment.

Conduct of a T-cell-dependent antibody response (TDAR) assay in rodents according to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Test Guideline OPPTS 870.7800 is now required for chemical pesticide active ingredients registered in the United States. To assess potential regulatory impact, a retrospective analysis was developed using TDAR tests conducted on 78 pesticide chemicals from 46 separate chemical classes. The objective of the retrospective analysis was to examine the frequency of positive responses and determine the potential for the TDAR to yield lower endpoints than those utilized to calculate reference doses (RfDs). A reduction in the TDAR response was observed at only the high-dose level in five studies, while it was unaltered in the remaining studies. Importantly, for all 78 pesticide chemicals, the TDAR no-observed-adverse-effect levels (TDAR NOAELs) were greater than the NOAELS currently in use as risk assessment endpoints. The TDAR NOAELs were higher than the current EPA-selected endpoints for the chronic RfD, short-term, intermediate and long-term exposure scenarios by 3-27,000, 3-1,688, 3-1,688 and 4.9-1,688 times, respectively. Based on this analysis, conduct of the TDAR assay had minimal impact on hazard identification and did not impact human health risk assessments for the pesticides included in this evaluation. These data strongly support employment of alternative approaches including initial weight-of-evidence analysis for immunotoxic potential prior to conducting functional immunotoxicity testing for pesticide active ingredients.

The acquisition and application of absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) data in agricultural chemical safety assessments.

A proposal has been developed by the Agricultural Chemical Safety Assessment (ACSA) Technical Committee of the ILSI Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) for an improved approach to assessing the safety of crop protection chemicals. The goal is to ensure that studies are scientifically appropriate and necessary without being redundant, and that tests emphasize toxicological endpoints and exposure durations that are relevant for risk assessment. Incorporation of pharmacokinetic studies describing absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion is an essential tool for improving the design and interpretation of toxicity studies and their application for safety assessment. A tiered approach is described in which basic pharmacokinetic studies, similar to those for pharmaceuticals, are conducted for regulatory submission. Subsequent tiers provide additional information in an iterative manner, depending on pharmacokinetic properties, toxicity study results, and the intended uses of the compound.