Jyotigna Mehta

The mouse carcinogenicity study is no longer a scientifically justifiable core data requirement for the safety assessment of pesticides

Regulatory tests investigating pesticide carcinogenicity potential routinely comprise a battery of in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity studies and two cancer bioassays, one in rats and one in mice. The genotoxicity testing strategy essentially ensures that genotoxic compounds are eliminated, and any carcinogens identified in subsequent lifetime studies are probably nongenotoxic in character. Assessment of 202 pesticide evaluations from the European Union review programme under Directive 91/414/EEC indicated that the mouse carcinogenicity study contributed little or nothing to either derivation of an acceptable daily intake (ADI) for assessment of chronic risk to humans, or hazard classification for labelling purposes. From a pesticide approval perspective, the mouse study did not influence a single outcome. From a risk assessment perspective, the ADI for just one pesticide was based on tumours in mice and this would have barely changed if the mouse data had not been available. In total, only 10 (5%) pesticide ADIs were based solely on the mouse carcinogenicity study and even in these few cases, a similar value would have been identified from other studies if the mouse study had not been available. For pesticides with treatment-related tumours only in mice, just three, or 1.5%, were classified as carcinogens and all were in the lowest category, Category 3 (R40). For pesticides with treatment-related tumours in mice and rats, the mouse data were probably the main, if not the only, cause for another three cases of R40 classification. Absence of the mouse studies would not have influenced assignment of the higher, Category 2 (R45), cancer classification for any substance with treatment-related tumours in both species as all decisions for these substances were limited to Category 3 or ‘unclassified’ outcomes. Over 100,000 mice were used to test these pesticides. This review shows that the mouse carcinogenicity studies did not provide significant information over and above that provided by the rat studies, and underpins the opportunity, from both a scientific and an animal welfare perspective, to remove the mouse carcinogenicity study from regulatory data requirements for the testing of pesticides.

Interlaboratory Validation of 1% Pluronic L92 Surfactant as a Suitable, Aqueous Vehicle for Testing Pesticide Formulations Using the Murine Local Lymph Node Assay

The mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA) has become the preferred test for evaluating the dermal sensitization potential of chemicals and requirements are now emerging for its use in the evaluation of their formulated products, especially in the European Union. However, despite its widespread use and extensive validation, the use of this assay for directly testing mixtures and formulated products has been questioned, which could lead to repeat testing using multiple animal models. As pesticide formulations are typically a specific complex blend of chemicals for use as aqueous-based dilutions, traditional vehicles prescribed for the LLNA may change the properties of these formulations leading to inaccurate test results and hazard identification. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an aqueous solution of Pluronic L92 block copolymer surfactant (L92) as a vehicle in the mouse LLNA across five laboratories. Three chemicals with known sensitization potential and four pesticide formulations for which the sensitization potential in guinea pigs and/or humans had previously been assessed were used. Identical LLNA protocols and test materials were used in the evaluation. Assessment of the positive control chemicals, hexylcinnamaldehyde, formaldehyde, and potassium dichromate revealed positive results when using 1% aqueous L92 as the vehicle. Furthermore, results for these chemicals were reproducible among the five laboratories and demonstrated consistent relative potency determinations. The four pesticide formulations diluted in 1% aqueous L92 also demonstrated reproducible results in the LLNA among the five laboratories. Results for these test materials were also consistent with those generated previously using guinea pigs or from human experience. These data support testing aqueous compatible chemicals or pesticide formulations using the mouse LLNA, and provide additional support for the use of 1% aqueous L92 as a suitable, aqueous-based vehicle.

An in vitro approach for comparative interspecies metabolism of agrochemicals

ABSTRACT The metabolism and elimination of a xenobiotic has a direct bearing on its potential to cause toxicity in an organism. The confidence with which data from safety studies can be extrapolated to humans depends, among other factors, upon knowing whether humans are systemically exposed to the same chemical entities (i.e. a parent compound and its metabolites) as the laboratory animals used to study toxicity. Ideally, to understand a metabolite in terms of safety, both the chemical structure and the systemic exposure would need to be determined. However, as systemic exposure data (i.e. blood concentration/time data of test material or metabolites) in humans will not be available for agrochemicals, an in vitro approach must be taken. This paper outlines an in vitro experimental approach for evaluating interspecies metabolic comparisons between humans and animal species used in safety studies. The aim is to ensure, where possible, that all potential human metabolites are also present in the species used in the safety studies. If a metabolite is only observed in human in vitro samples and is not present in a metabolic pathway defined in the toxicological species already, the toxicological relevance of this metabolite must be evaluated. HIGHLIGHTSGuidance outlining in vitro comparative metabolism approaches for agrochemicals.The design allows metabolic comparison between humans and species in safety studies.This experimental approach allows identification of human unique metabolites.Human unique metabolites may need to be addressed in the regulatory risk assessment.

The future trajectory of adverse outcome pathways: a commentary

The advent of adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) has provided a new lexicon for description of mechanistic toxicology, and a renewed enthusiasm for exploring modes of action resulting in adverse health and environmental effects. In addition, AOPs have been used successfully as a framework for the design and development of non-animal approaches to toxicity testing. Although the value of AOPs is widely recognised, there remain challenges and opportunities associated with their use in practise. The purpose of this article is to consider specifically how the future trajectory of AOPs may provide a basis for addressing some of those challenges and opportunities.

A retrospective analysis of in vivo eye irritation, skin irritation and skin sensitisation studies with agrochemical formulations: Setting the scene for development of alternative strategies

&NA; Analysis of the prevalence of health effects in large scale databases is key in defining testing strategies within the context of Integrated Approaches on Testing and Assessment (IATA), and is relevant to drive policy changes in existing regulatory toxicology frameworks towards non‐animal approaches. A retrospective analysis of existing results from in vivo skin irritation, eye irritation, and skin sensitisation studies on a database of 223 agrochemical formulations is herein published. For skin or eye effects, high prevalence of mild to non‐irritant formulations (i.e. per GHS, CLP or EPA classification) would generally suggest a bottom‐up approach. Severity of erythema or corneal opacity, for skinor eye effects respectively, were the key drivers for classification, consistent with existing literature. The reciprocal predictivity of skin versus eye irritation and the good negative predictivity of the GHS additivity calculation approach (>85%) provided valuable non‐testing evidence for irritation endpoints. For dermal sensitisation, concordance on data from three different methods confirmed the high false negative rate for the Buehler method in this product class. These results have been reviewed together with existing literature on the use of in vitro alternatives for agrochemical formulations, to propose improvements to current regulatory strategies and to identify further research needs. HighlightsRetrospective analysis of local toxicity data from 223 agrochemical formulations.Low prevalence of skin and eye irritants, suggesting bottom‐up approaches.GHS additivity showed good negative predictivity for skin and eye irritation.The reciprocal negative predictivity of skin versus eye irritation confirmed.

Biometrical evaluation of the performance of the revised OECD Test Guideline 402 for assessing acute dermal toxicity

&NA; A comprehensive biometrical assessment was conducted to compare the performance of multiple test designs for acute dermal systemic toxicity to support the animal welfare update to the original OECD Test Guideline (TG) 402 for acute dermal toxicity. The test designs evaluated included: (1) two, three, or five animals per dose group (2) evident toxicity or lethality endpoints and (3) absence or presence of a one‐animal sighting study. The revision of TG 402 respected the 3R principles (replace, reduce, refine) of animal testing. The results demonstrate that the TG 402 test design can be optimised with reduced animal numbers per test group, such that a scenario of two animals per group following a sighting study at a starting dose of 200 mg/kg bw (unless further information is available to better define the starting dose) would provide a classification which in most cases is conservative, without compromising both the statistical ability of the study to assess dermal toxicity, or the relevant classification outcome. HighlightsThe TG 402 test design can be optimised with fewer animals per test group.One‐animal sighting study reduces animal use & increases performance of dermal FDP.Evident toxicity used fewer animals and produced more conservative classifications.Lethality produced more correct classifications, but used more animals.Use of a novel visualisation tool to evaluate test design options.