Thresholds of adversity for endocrine disrupting substances: a conceptual case study.

For endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC) the existence of "safe exposure levels", that is exposure levels that do not present an appreciable risk to human health is most controversially discussed, as is the existence of health-based reference values. Concerns have been especially raised that EDCs might not possess a threshold level such that no exposure level to EDCs can be considered safe. To explore whether or not threshold levels can be identified, we performed a screening exercise on 14 pesticidal and biocidal active substances previously identified as EDCs in the European Union. The respective substances are ideal subjects for case studies to review for endocrine activity and disruptive potential following well-defined regulatory assessment based on solid data to effectually establish adversity as consequence of endocrine disruption. Dimethomorph, metiram and propiconazole for which the weight of evidence demonstrating endocrine disruption was the strongest were used as subjects for further study. Epoxiconazole was additionally selected as its effects on the endocrine system are extensive. For all four substances, analysis of the toxicological data clearly indicated thresholds of adversity below which no adverse effects mediated through an endocrine mechanism were observed. Particular emphasis was placed on mechanistic considerations including homeostasis and the concept of adversity. As a proof of concept this study provides evidence that like other substances of toxicological concern EDCs have threshold levels for adversity. While for some EDCs the respective thresholds might indeed be very low this shows that, data allowing, for other EDCs sufficiently protective reference values can be derived.

A review of the safety evidence on recombinant human lactoferrin for use as a food ingredient.

Published studies on the glycosylation, absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and safety outcomes of orally ingested recombinant human lactoferrin (rhLF) were reviewed in the context of unanswered safety questions, including alloimmunization, allergenicity, and immunotoxicity potential of rhLF during repeated exposure. The primary objective was to summarize current safety data of rhLF produced in transgenic host expression systems. Overall, results from animal and human studies showed that rhLF was well tolerated and safe. Animal data showed no significant toxicity-related outcomes among any safety or tolerability endpoints. The no observed adverse effect levels (NOAEL) were at the highest level tested in both iron-desaturated and -saturated forms of rhLF. Although one study reported outcomes of rhLF on immune parameters, no animal studies directly assessed immunogenicity or immunotoxicity from a safety perspective. Data from human studies were primarily reported as adverse events (AE). They showed no or fewer rhLF-related AE compared to control and no evidence of toxicity, dose-limiting toxicities, or changes in iron status in various subpopulations. However, no human studies evaluated the immunomodulatory potential of rhLF as a measure of safety. Following this review, a roadmap outlining preclinical and clinical studies with relevant safety endpoints was developed to address the unanswered safety questions.

Quantitative read-across structure-activity relationship (q-RASAR): A novel approach to estimate the subchronic oral safety (NOAEL) of diverse organic chemicals in rats.

We have developed a quantitative safety prediction model for subchronic repeated doses of diverse organic chemicals on rats using the novel quantitative read-across structure-activity relationship (q-RASAR) approach, which uses similarity-based descriptors for predictive model generation. The experimental -Log (NOAEL) values have been used here as a potential indicator of oral subchronic safety on rats as it determines the maximum dose level for which no observed adverse effects of chemicals are found. A total of 186 data points of diverse organic chemicals have been used for the model generation using structural and physicochemical (0D-2D) descriptors. The read-across-derived similarity, error, and concordance measures (RASAR descriptors) have been extracted from the preliminary 0D-2D descriptors. Then, the combined pool of RASAR and the identified 0D-2D descriptors of the training set were employed to develop the final models by using the partial least squares (PLS) algorithm. The developed PLS model was rigorously validated by various internal and external validation metrics as suggested by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The final q-RASAR model is proven to be statistically sound, robust and externally predictive (R2 = 0.85, Q2LOO = 0.82 and Q2F1 = 0.94), superseding the internal as well as external predictivity of the corresponding quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) model as well as previously reported subchronic repeated dose toxicity model found in the literature. In a nutshell, the q-RASAR is an effective approach that has the potential to be used as a good alternative way to improve external predictivity, interpretability, and transferability for subchronic oral safety prediction as well as ecotoxicity risk identification.

The estimation and translation uncertainties in applying NOAEL to clinical dose escalation.

The systemic exposure at the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) estimated from animals is an important criterion commonly applied to guard the safety of participants in clinical trials of investigational drugs. However, the discrepancy in toxicity profile between species is widely recognized. The objective of the work reported here was to assess, via simulation, the level of uncertainty in the NOAEL estimated from an animal species and the effectiveness of applying its associated exposure value to minimizing the toxicity risk to human. Simulations were conducted for dose escalation of an investigational new chemical entity with hypothetical exposure-response models for the dose-limiting toxicity under a variety of conditions, in terms of between-species relative sensitivity to the toxicity and the between-subject variability in the key parameters determining the sensitivity and pharmacokinetics. Results show a high uncertainty in the NOAEL estimation. Notably, even when the animal species and humans are assumed to have the same sensitivity, which may not be realistic, limiting clinical dose to the exposure at the NOAEL that has been identified in the animals carries a high risk of either causing toxicity or under-dosing, hence undermining the therapeutic potential of the drug candidate. These findings highlight the importance of understanding the mechanism of the toxicity profile and its cross-species translatability, as well as the importance of understanding the dose requirement for achieving adequate pharmacology.