Search

The current state of the art of (Quantitative) Structure-Activity Relationships ((Q)SARs) to predict environmental toxicity is assessed along with recommendations to develop these models further. The acute toxicity of compounds acting by the non-polar narcotic mechanism of action can be well predicted, however other approaches, including read-across, may be required for compounds acting by specific mechanisms of action. The chronic toxicity of compounds to environmental species is more difficult to predict from (Q)SARs, with robust data sets and more mechanistic information required. In addition, the toxicity of mixtures is little addressed by (Q)SAR approaches. Developments in environmental toxicology including Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) and omics responses should be utilised to develop better, more mechanistically relevant, (Q)SAR models.

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.

Assessment of the potential of compounds to cause harm to the aquatic environment is an integral part of the REACH legislation. To reduce the number of vertebrate and invertebrate animals required for this analysis alternative approaches have been promoted. Category formation and read-across have been applied widely to predict toxicity. A key approach to grouping for environmental toxicity is the Verhaar scheme which uses rules to classify compounds into one of four mechanistic categories. These categories provide a mechanistic basis for grouping and any further predictive modelling. A computational implementation of the Verhaar scheme is available in Toxtree v2.6. The work presented herein demonstrates how modifications to the implementation of Verhaar between version 1.5 and 2.6 of Toxtree have improved performance by reducing the number of incorrectly classified compounds. However, for the datasets used in this analysis, version 2.6 classifies more compounds as outside of the domain of the model. Further amendments to the classification rules have been implemented here using a post-processing filter encoded as a KNIME workflow. This results in fewer compounds being classified as outside of the model domain, further improving the predictivity of the scheme. The utility of the modification described herein is demonstrated through building quality, mechanism-specific Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship (QSAR) models for the compounds within specific mechanistic categories., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Category formation, grouping and read across methods are broadly applicable in toxicological assessments and may be used to fill data gaps for chemical safety assessment and regulatory decisions. In order to facilitate a transparent and systematic approach to aid regulatory acceptance, a strategy to evaluate chemical category membership, to support the use of read-across predictions that may be used to fill data gaps for regulatory decisions is proposed. There are two major aspects of any read-across exercise, namely assessing similarity and uncertainty. While there can be an over-arching rationale for grouping organic substances based on molecular structure and chemical properties, these similarities alone are generally not sufficient to justify a read-across prediction. Further scientific justification is normally required to justify the chemical grouping, typically including considerations of bioavailability, metabolism and biological/mechanistic plausibility. Sources of uncertainty include a variety of elements which are typically divided into two main issues: the uncertainty associated firstly with the similarity justification and secondly the completeness of the read-across argument. This article focuses on chronic toxicity, whilst acknowledging the approaches are applicable to all endpoints. Templates, developed from work to prepare for the application of new toxicological data to read-across assessment, are presented. These templates act as proposals to assist in assessing similarity in the context of chemistry, toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics as well as to guide the systematic characterisation of uncertainty both in the context of the similarity rationale, the read across data and overall approach and conclusion. Lastly, a workflow for reporting a read-across prediction is suggested., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The assessment of data quality is a crucial element in many disciplines such as predictive toxicology and risk assessment. Currently, the reliability of toxicity data is assessed on the basis of testing information alone (adherence to Good Laboratory Practice (GLP), detailed testing protocols, etc.). Common practice is to take one toxicity data point per compound - usually the one with the apparently highest reliability. All other toxicity data points (for the same experiment and compound) from other sources are neglected. To show the benefits of incorporating the "less reliable" data, a simple, independent, statistical approach to assess data quality and reliability on a mathematical basis was developed. A large data set of toxicity values to Aliivibrio fischeri was assessed. The data set contained 1813 data points for 1227 different compounds, including 203 identified as non-polar narcotic. Log KOW values were calculated and non-polar narcosis quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models were built. A statistical approach to data quality assessment, which is based on data outlier omission and confidence scoring, improved the linear QSARs. The results indicate that a beneficial method for using large data sets containing multiple data values per compound and highly variable study data has been developed. Furthermore this statistical approach can help to develop novel QSARs and support risk assessment by obtaining more reliable values for biological endpoints., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Read-across is a data gap filling technique used within category and analogue approaches. It has been utilized as an alternative approach to address information requirements under various past and present regulatory programs such as the OECD High Production Volume Programme as well as the EU's Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of CHemicals (REACH) regulation. Although read-across raises a number of expectations, many misconceptions still remain around what it truly represents; how to address its associated justification in a robust and scientifically credible manner; what challenges/issues exist in terms of its application and acceptance; and what future efforts are needed to resolve them. In terms of future enhancements, read-across is likely to embrace more biologically-orientated approaches consistent with the Toxicity in the 21st Century vision (Tox-21c). This Food for Thought article, which is notably not a consensus report, aims to discuss a number of these aspects and, in doing so, to raise awareness of the ongoing efforts and activities to enhance read-across. It also intends to set the agenda for a CAAT read-across initiative in 2014-2015 to facilitate the proper use of this technique.

Tests with vertebrates are an integral part of environmental hazard identification and risk assessment of chemicals, plant protection products, pharmaceuticals, biocides, feed additives and effluents. These tests raise ethical and economic concerns and are considered as inappropriate for assessing all of the substances and effluents that require regulatory testing. Hence, there is a strong demand for replacement, reduction and refinement strategies and methods. However, until now alternative approaches have only rarely been used in regulatory settings. This review provides an overview on current regulations of chemicals and the requirements for animal tests in environmental hazard and risk assessment. It aims to highlight the potential areas for alternative approaches in environmental hazard identification and risk assessment. Perspectives and limitations of alternative approaches to animal tests using vertebrates in environmental toxicology, i.e. mainly fish and amphibians, are discussed. Free access to existing (proprietary) animal test data, availability of validated alternative methods and a practical implementation of conceptual approaches such as the Adverse Outcome Pathways and Integrated Testing Strategies were identified as major requirements towards the successful development and implementation of alternative approaches. Although this article focusses on European regulations, its considerations and conclusions are of global relevance., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

For more than a decade, the integration of human and environmental risk assessment (RA) has become an attractive vision. At the same time, existing European regulations of chemical substances such as REACH (EC Regulation No. 1907/2006), the Plant Protection Products Regulation (EC regulation 1107/2009) and Biocide Regulation (EC Regulation 528/2012) continue to ask for sector-specific RAs, each of which have their individual information requirements regarding exposure and hazard data, and also use different methodologies for the ultimate risk quantification. In response to this difference between the vision for integration and the current scientific and regulatory practice, the present paper outlines five medium-term opportunities for integrating human and environmental RA, followed by detailed discussions of the associated major components and their state of the art. Current hazard assessment approaches are analyzed in terms of data availability and quality, and covering non-test tools, the integrated testing strategy (ITS) approach, the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) concept, methods for assessing uncertainty, and the issue of explicitly treating mixture toxicity. With respect to exposure, opportunities for integrating exposure assessment are discussed, taking into account the uncertainty, standardization and validation of exposure modeling as well as the availability of exposure data. A further focus is on ways to complement RA by a socio-economic assessment (SEA) in order to better inform about risk management options. In this way, the present analysis, developed as part of the EU FP7 project HEROIC, may contribute to paving the way for integrating, where useful and possible, human and environmental RA in a manner suitable for its coupling with SEA., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs) provide a useful tool to define a relationship between chemical structure and toxicity and allow for the prediction of the toxicity of untested chemicals. QSAR models based upon an anaesthetic or narcosis mechanism represent a baseline, or minimum, toxicity, i.e. unless a chemical acts by another, more specific, mechanism, its toxicity will be predicted by such models. The aim of this investigation was to develop baseline models for the acute toxicity of chemicals to mammals (rat and mouse) following the oral route of administration. The availability of such baseline toxicity models for mammalian species can provide a probe for testing new chemicals with respect to their molecular mechanism of toxicity. Multiple-regression type structure-toxicity relationships were derived . (i.e., from oral log LD(50)(-1) data for mammalian species (rat and mouse) and the 1-octanol/water partition coefficient (log P) of classic non-polar narcotics). Subsequently, these models were used to distinguish between reactive chemicals of different mechanistic domains and baseline toxic chemicals. Comparison of measured toxicity data for oral rat and mouse LD(50) with predictions from baseline QSAR provides a means of identifying mechanistic categories and for categorising more specific acute mechanisms., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

There is a range of in silico techniques that can be applied to predict the toxicity of chemicals. This paper discusses the use of methods to create "local" models, particularly based around category formation and read-across, to predict toxicity. Specifically, this is illustrated with regard to categories for predicting skin sensitisation and teratogenicity. These were formed using mechanistic and structural similarity techniques to group chemicals. Local QSAR models based on grouping chemicals have the advantage that they are transparent, simple and mechanistically derived. In addition, there are a number of freely available software tools to assist in their derivation. The disadvantages include that they are labour-intensive to develop and restricted to local areas of chemistry.

Integrated testing strategies have been proposed to facilitate the process of chemicals risk assessment to fulfil the requirements of the proposed EU REACH system. Here, we present individual, decision-tree style, strategies for the eleven major toxicity endpoints of the REACH system, including human health effects and ecotoxicity. These strategies make maximum use of non-animal approaches to hazard identification, before resorting to traditional animal test methods. Each scheme: a) comprises a mixture of validated and non-validated assays (distinguished in the schemes); and b) decision points at key stages to allow the cessation of further testing, should it be possible to use the available information to classify and label and/or undertake risk assessment. The rationale and scientific justification for each of the schemes, with respect to the validation status of the tests involved and their individual advantages and limitations, will be discussed in detail in a series of future publications.

Liverpool John Moores University and FRAME were recently awarded a DEFRA tender to conduct a review of the status of alternative approaches to animal testing, and to recommend further research with regard to the forthcoming European Union REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) system for the safety testing and risk assessment of chemicals. The outcome of the project is summarised, including the prospects for in vitro and in silico testing, areas where reduction and refinement could be applied, and how decision-tree integrated testing strategies could be used to reduce the number of animals needed to fulfil the testing requirements of the REACH system. This paper is a prelude to a series of individual papers on detailed suggestions for applying non-animal methods to each of the major toxicity endpoints in REACH.

A large data set containing values for fish, algae and Daphnia toxicity for more than 2000 chemicals and mixtures was investigated. The data set was taken from the New Chemicals Data Base of the European Union [hosted by the European Chemicals Bureau, Joint Research Centre, European Commission (http://ecb.jrc.it)]. The data are submitted by industry, according to the requirements of EU Council Directive 67/548/EEC as amended for the seventh time by EU Council Directive 92/32/EEC. The toxicities of neutral chemicals, salts, metal complexes, as well as chemical mixtures were extracted. A baseline effect was demonstrated by chemicals known to act by a narcotic mechanism of action, i.e., a relationship was observed between the toxicity and the logarithm of the octanol-water partition coefficient (log P). However, the prediction of the toxicity of more reactive chemicals was found to require the use of additional descriptors.

This article is a review of the use of quantitative (and qualitative) structure-activity relationships (QSARs and SARs) by regulatory agencies and authorities to predict acute toxicity, mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, and other health effects. A number of SAR and QSAR applications, by regulatory agencies and authorities, are reviewed. These include the use of simple QSAR analyses, as well as the use of multivariate QSARs, and a number of different expert system approaches.

Quantitative structure-activity relationships of toxicity are discussed as a means of assessing the value of the Microtox test which uses the light-emitting bacterium Vibrio fisheri (Photobacterium phosphoreum) as a replacement for toxicity testing in higher species. The Microtox test is found to be a good surrogate for testing in fish, for compounds acting by the narcosis mechanism. However, for reactive chemicals the Microtox test significantly underestimates the potential hazard. It should not therefore be used in isolation for such chemicals, but rather as part of a battery of tests.