Search

Authorisation of ready to use plant protection products (PPPs) usually relies on the testing of acute and local toxicity only. This is in stark contrast to the situation for active substances where the mandatory data set comprises a most comprehensive set of studies. While the combination of certain active ingredients and co-formulants may nevertheless result in increased toxicity of the final product such combinations have never been evaluated systematically for complex and long-term toxicological endpoints. We therefore investigated the effect of three frequently used co-formulants on the toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic of the representative active substance combination of tebuconazol (Teb) and prothioconazol (Pro) or of cypermethrin (Cpm) and piperonyl butoxide (Pip), respectively. With all four active substances being potential liver steatogens, cytotoxicity and triglyceride accumulation in HepaRG were used as primary endpoints. Concomitantly transcriptomics and biochemical studies were applied to interrogate for effects on gene expression or inhibition of CYP3A4 as key enzyme for functionalization. Some of the tested combinations clearly showed more than additive effects, partly due to CYP3A4 enzyme inhibition. Other effects comprised the modulation of the expression and activity of steatosis-related nuclear key receptors. Altogether, the findings highlight the need for a more systematic consideration of toxicodynamic and toxicokinetic mixture effects during assessment of PPPs., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Philip Marx-Stoelting reports financial support was provided by Federal Institute for Risk Assessment. Philip Marx-Stoelting reports a relationship with Federal Institute for Risk Assessment that includes: employment. Mawien Karaca reports a relationship with Federal Institute for Risk Assessment that includes: employment. Tewes Tralau reports a relationship with Federal Institute for Risk Assessment that includes: employment. Denise Bloch reports a relationship with Federal Institute for Risk Assessment that includes: employment. Tobias Willenbockel reports a relationship with Federal Institute for Risk Assessment that includes: employment., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This survey by the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) highlights that 'omics technologies are generally not yet applied to meet standard information requirements during regulatory hazard assessment. While they are used within weight-of-evidence approaches to investigate substances' modes-of-action, consistent approaches for the generation, processing and interpretation of 'omics data are not applied. To date, no 'omics technology has been standardised or validated. Best practices for performing 'omics studies for regulatory purposes (e.g., microarrays for transcriptome profiling) remain to be established. Therefore, three frameworks for (i) establishing a Good-Laboratory Practice-like context for collecting, storing and curating 'omics data; (ii) 'omics data processing; and (iii) quantitative WoE approaches to interpret 'omics data have been developed, that are presented in this journal supplement. Application of the frameworks will enable between-study comparison of results, which will facilitate the regulatory applicability of 'omics data. The frameworks do not constitute prescriptive protocols precluding any other data analysis method, but provide a baseline for analysis that can be applied to all data allowing ready cross-comparison. Data analysis that does not follow the frameworks can be justified and the resulting data can be compared with the Framework-based common analysis output., (Crown Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Prevailing knowledge gaps in linking specific molecular changes to apical outcomes and methodological uncertainties in the generation, storage, processing, and interpretation of 'omics data limit the application of 'omics technologies in regulatory toxicology. Against this background, the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) convened a workshop Applying 'omics technologies in chemicals risk assessment that is reported herein. Ahead of the workshop, multi-expert teams drafted frameworks on best practices for (i) a Good-Laboratory Practice-like context for collecting, storing and curating 'omics data; (ii) the processing of 'omics data; and (iii) weight-of-evidence approaches for integrating 'omics data. The workshop participants confirmed the relevance of these Frameworks to facilitate the regulatory applicability and use of 'omics data, and the workshop discussions provided input for their further elaboration. Additionally, the key objective (iv) to establish approaches to connect 'omics perturbations to phenotypic alterations was addressed. Generally, it was considered promising to strive to link gene expression changes and pathway perturbations to the phenotype by mapping them to specific adverse outcome pathways. While further work is necessary before gene expression changes can be used to establish safe levels of substance exposure, the ECETOC workshop provided important incentives towards achieving this goal., (Crown Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

'Omics technologies are gaining importance to support regulatory toxicity studies. Prerequisites for performing 'omics studies considering GLP principles were discussed at the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) Workshop Applying 'omics technologies in Chemical Risk Assessment. A GLP environment comprises a standard operating procedure system, proper pre-planning and documentation, and inspections of independent quality assurance staff. To prevent uncontrolled data changes, the raw data obtained in the respective 'omics data recording systems have to be specifically defined. Further requirements include transparent and reproducible data processing steps, and safe data storage and archiving procedures. The software for data recording and processing should be validated, and data changes should be traceable or disabled. GLP-compliant quality assurance of 'omics technologies appears feasible for many GLP requirements. However, challenges include (i) defining, storing, and archiving the raw data; (ii) transparent descriptions of data processing steps; (iii) software validation; and (iv) ensuring complete reproducibility of final results with respect to raw data. Nevertheless, 'omics studies can be supported by quality measures (e.g., GLP principles) to ensure quality control, reproducibility and traceability of experiments. This enables regulators to use 'omics data in a fit-for-purpose context, which enhances their applicability for risk assessment., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A framework for the quantitative weight-of-evidence (QWoE) analysis of 'omics data for regulatory purposes is presented. The QWoE framework encompasses seven steps to evaluate 'omics data (also together with non-'omics data): (1) Hypothesis formulation, identification and weighting of lines of evidence (LoEs). LoEs conjoin different (types of) studies that are used to critically test the hypothesis. As an essential component of the QWoE framework, step 1 includes the development of templates for scoring sheets that predefine scoring criteria with scores of 0-4 to enable a quantitative determination of study quality and data relevance; (2) literature searches and categorisation of studies into the pre-defined LoEs; (3) and (4) quantitative assessment of study quality and data relevance using the respective pre-defined scoring sheets for each study; (5) evaluation of LoE-specific strength of evidence based upon the study quality and study relevance scores of the studies conjoined in the respective LoE; (6) integration of the strength of evidence from the individual LoEs to determine the overall strength of evidence; (7) characterisation of uncertainties and conclusion on the QWoE. To put the QWoE framework in practice, case studies are recommended to confirm the relevance of its different steps, or to adapt them as necessary., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Long perceived as a form of exotic self-expression in some social fringe groups, tattoos have left their maverick image behind and become mainstream, particularly for young people. Historically, tattoo-related health and safety regulations have focused on rules of hygiene and prevention of infections. Meanwhile, the increasing popularity of tattooing has led to the development of many new colours, allowing tattoos to be more spectacular than ever before. However, little is known about the toxicological risks of the ingredients used. For risk assessment, safe intradermal application of these pigments needs data for toxicity and biokinetics and increased knowledge about the removal of tattoos. Other concerns are the potential for phototoxicity, substance migration, and the possible metabolic conversion of tattoo ink ingredients into toxic substances. Similar considerations apply to cleavage products that are formed during laser-assisted tattoo removal. In this Review, we summarise the issues of concern, putting them into context, and provide perspectives for the assessment of the acute and chronic health effects associated with tattooing., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)