Search

A significant challenge in the traditional human health risk assessment of agrochemicals is the uncertainty in quantifying the interspecies differences between animal models and humans. To work toward a more accurate and animal-free risk determination, new approaches such as physiologically based kinetic (PBK) modeling have been used to perform dosimetry extrapolation from animals to humans. However, the regulatory use and acceptance of PBK modeling is limited for chemicals that lack in vivo animal pharmacokinetic (PK) data, given the inability to evaluate models. To address these challenges, this study developed PBK models in the absence of in vivo PK data for the fungicide propiconazole, an activator of constitutive androstane receptor (CAR)/pregnane X receptor (PXR). A fit-for-purpose read-across approach was integrated with hierarchical clustering - an unsupervised machine learning algorithm, to bridge the knowledge gap. The integration allowed the incorporation of a broad spectrum of attributes for analog consideration, and enabled the analog selection in a simple, reproducible, and objective manner. The applicability was evaluated and demonstrated using penconazole (source) and three pseudo-unknown target chemicals (epoxiconazole, tebuconazole and triadimefon). Applying this machine learning-enhanced read-across approach, difenoconazole was selected as the most appropriate analog for propiconazole. A mouse PBK model was developed and evaluated for difenoconazole (source), with the mode of action of CAR/PXR activation incorporated to simulate the in vivo autoinduction of metabolism. The difenoconazole mouse model then served as a template for constructing the propiconazole mouse model. A parallelogram approach was subsequently applied to develop the propiconazole rat and human models, enabling a quantitative assessment of interspecies differences in dosimetry. This integrated approach represents a substantial advancement toward refining risk assessment of propiconazole within the framework of animal alternative safety assessment strategies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Authors of this manuscript are employees of Syngenta Crop Protection LLC. Syngenta Crop Protection LLC is a provider of agricultural science and technology, including crop protection chemical products such as propiconazole., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The objective of this evaluation is to understand the human health impacts of mountaintop removal (MTR) mining, the major method of coal mining in and around Central Appalachia. MTR mining impacts the air, water, and soil and raises concerns about potential adverse health effects in neighboring communities; exposures associated with MTR mining include particulate matter (PM), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), metals, hydrogen sulfide, and other recognized harmful substances., Methods: A systematic review was conducted of published studies of MTR mining and community health, occupational studies of MTR mining, and any available animal and in vitro experimental studies investigating the effects of exposures to MTR-mining-related chemical mixtures. Six databases (Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Toxline, and Web of Science) were searched with customized terms, and no restrictions on publication year or language, through October 27, 2016. The eligibility criteria included all human population studies and animal models of human health, direct and indirect measures of MTR-mining exposure, any health-related effect or change in physiological response, and any study design type. Risk of bias was assessed for observational and experimental studies using an approach developed by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT). To provide context for these health effects, a summary of the exposure literature is included that focuses on describing findings for outdoor air, indoor air, and drinking water., Results: From a literature search capturing 3088 studies, 33 human studies (29 community, four occupational), four experimental studies (two in rat, one in vitro and in mice, one in C. elegans), and 58 MTR mining exposure studies were identified. A number of health findings were reported in observational human studies, including cardiopulmonary effects, mortality, and birth defects. However, concerns for risk of bias were identified, especially with respect to exposure characterization, accounting for confounding variables (such as socioeconomic status), and methods used to assess health outcomes. Typically, exposure was assessed by proximity of residence or hospital to coal mining or production level at the county level. In addition, assessing the consistency of findings was challenging because separate publications likely included overlapping case and comparison groups. For example, 11 studies of mortality were conducted with most reporting higher rates associated with coal mining, but many of these relied on the same national datasets and were unable to consider individual-level contributors to mortality such as poor socioeconomic status or smoking. Two studies of adult rats reported impaired microvascular and cardiac mitochondrial function after intratracheal exposure to PM from MTR-mining sites. Exposures associated with MTR mining included reports of PM levels that sometimes exceeded Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards; higher levels of dust, trace metals, hydrogen sulfide gas; and a report of increased public drinking water violations., Discussion: This systematic review could not reach conclusions on community health effects of MTR mining because of the strong potential for bias in the current body of human literature. Improved characterization of exposures by future community health studies and further study of the effects of MTR mining chemical mixtures in experimental models will be critical to determining health risks of MTR mining to communities. Without such work, uncertainty will remain regarding the impact of these practices on the health of the people who breathe the air and drink the water affected by MTR mining., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)