Search

Although frequently examined as a target organ for non-endocrine toxicity, histopathological evaluation of the liver is becoming a routine component of endocrine disruption studies that utilize various fish species as test subjects. However, the interpretation of microscopic liver findings can be challenging, especially when attempting to distinguish adverse changes associated with endocrine disrupting substances from those caused by systemic or direct hepatic toxicity. The purpose of this project was to conduct a critical assessment of the available peer-reviewed and grey literature concerning the histopathologic effects of reproductive endocrine active substances (EAS) and non-endocrine acting substances in the livers of fish models, and to determine if liver histopathology can be used to reliably distinguish endocrine from non-endocrine etiologies. The results of this review suggest that few compound-specific histopathologic liver effects have been identified, among which are estrogen agonist-induced increases in hepatocyte basophilia and proteinaceous intravascular fluid in adult male teleosts, and potentially, decreased hepatocyte basophilia in female fish exposed to substances that possess androgenic, anti-estrogenic, or aromatase inhibitory activity. This review also used published standardized methodology to assess the credibility of the histopathology data in each of the 117 articles that reported liver effects of treatment, and consequently it was determined that in only 37% of those papers were the data considered either highly credible or credible. The outcome of this work highlights the value of histopathologic liver evaluation as an investigative tool for EAS studies, and provides information that may have implications for EAS hazard assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review critically examines the data on claimed endocrine-mediated adverse effects of chemicals on wildlife populations. It focuses on the effects of current-use chemicals, and compares their apparent scale and severity with those of legacy chemicals which have been withdrawn from sale or use, although they may still be present in the environment. The review concludes that the effects on wildlife of many legacy chemicals with endocrine activity are generally greater than those caused by current-use chemicals, with the exception of ethinylestradiol and other estrogens found in sewage effluents, which are causing widespread effects on fish populations. It is considered that current chemical testing regimes and risk assessment procedures, at least those to which pesticides and biocides are subjected, are in part responsible for this improvement. This is noteworthy as most ecotoxicological testing for regulatory purposes is currently focused on characterizing apical adverse effect endpoints rather than identifying the mechanism(s) responsible for any observed effects. Furthermore, a suite of internationally standardized ecotoxicity tests sensitive for potential endocrine-mediated effects is now in place, or under development, which should ensure further characterization of substances with these properties so that they can be adequately regulated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: To use and implement an assessment scheme for the evaluation of endocrine disrupting properties of chemicals in ecotoxicology, the types of effect need to be agreed. Effects that merit further consideration in this context should fulfil the following three criteria: caused by an endocrine mode of action, be adverse, and be relevant at the population level to reflect the protection goal of ecotoxicological assessments. Thereafter, a comparison of effect values, regardless of the causative mechanisms, should be made, firstly to determine if endocrine toxicity generates the lowest endpoint within a taxon, and secondly if it is the lowest endpoint compared to that of other taxa living in the same compartment. These comparisons inform on two levels of specificity and determine if endocrine-mediated side-effects determine the ecotoxicological profile of a chemical. Various quantitative measures for the assessment of potency are also presented, which could assist in determining how to handle substances in the risk assessment when a regulatory concern is identified. Finally, derogation criteria should be defined for compounds that were designed as endocrine disruptors for non-vertebrates and those for which there is ‘negligible exposure’. This paper discusses and provides proposals on how to apply these concepts for assessment of substances. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The amphibian metamorphosis assay (AMA; US Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] test guideline 890.1100 and Organisation for Economic Co‐Operation and Development test guideline 231) has been used for more than a decade to assess the potential thyroid‐mediated endocrine activity of chemicals. In 2013, in the context of the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program of the USEPA, a Scientific Advisory Panel reviewed the results from 18 studies and recommended changes to the AMA test guideline, including a modification to a fixed‐stage design rather than a fixed‐time (i.e., 21‐d) design. We describe an extended test design for the AMA (or EAMA) that includes thyroid histopathology and time to metamorphosis (Nieuwkoop–Faber [NF] stage 62), to address both the issues with the fixed‐time design and the specific question of thyroid‐mediated adversity in a shorter assay than the larval amphibian growth and development assay (LAGDA; Organisation for Economic Co‐Operation and Development test guideline 241), using fewer animals and resources. A demonstration study was conducted with the EAMA (up to NF stage 58) using sodium perchlorate. Data analyses and interpretation of the fixed‐stage design of the EAMA are more straightforward than the fixed‐time design because the fixed‐stage design avoids confounded morphometric measurements and thyroid histopathology caused by varying developmental stages at test termination. It also results in greater statistical power to detect metamorphic delays than the fixed‐time design. By preferentially extending the AMA to NF stage 62, suitable data can be produced to evaluate thyroid‐mediated adversity and preclude the need to perform a LAGDA for thyroid mode of action analysis. The LAGDA remains of further interest should investigations of longer term effects related to sexual development modulated though the hypothalamus–pituitary–gonadal axis be necessary. However, reproduction assessment or life cycle testing is currently not addressed in the LAGDA study design. This is better addressed by higher tier studies in fish, which should then include specific thyroid‐related endpoints. Environ Toxicol Chem 2021;40:2135–2144. © 2021 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A Weight-of-evidence (WoE) evaluation should be applied in assessing all the available data for the identification of endocrine disrupting (ED) properties of chemicals. The European Commission draft acts specifying criteria under the biocidal products and plant protection products regulations require that WoE is implemented for the assessment of such products. However, only some general considerations and principles of how a WoE should be conducted are provided. This paper reviews WoE approaches to distil key recommendations specifically for the evaluation of potential ED properties of chemicals. In a manner, which is consistent with existing, published WoE frameworks, the WoE evaluation of ED properties can be divided into four phases: 1) Definition of causal questions and data gathering and selection, 2) Review of individual studies, 3) Data integration and evaluation, and 4) Drawing conclusions based on inferences. Recommendations are made on how to conduct each phase robustly and transparently to help guide the WoE evaluation of potential endocrine disrupting properties of chemicals within a European regulatory context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] We developed an individual-based zebrafish population model. [•] We investigated the population-level impact of two endocrine disrupting chemicals. [•] Acute exposure had no effects at the population-level. [•] Chronic exposure had significant effects at the population-level. [•] Ecological models can link individual-level effects to population-level impacts. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The European regulation on plant protection products (1107/2009) (), the revisions to the biocides Directive (COM[2009]267) (), and the regulation concerning chemicals (Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006 ‘REACH’) (EC.2006) only support the marketing and use of chemical products on the basis that they do not induce endocrine disruption in humans or wildlife species. In the absence of agreed guidance on how to identify and evaluate endocrine activity and disruption within these pieces of legislation a European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) task force was formed to provide scientific criteria that may be used within the context of these three legislative documents. The resulting ECETOC technical report () and the associated workshop () presented a science-based concept on how to identify endocrine activity and disrupting properties of chemicals for both human health and the environment. The synthesis of the technical report and the workshop report was published by the ECETOC task force (). Specific scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine activity and disrupting properties that integrate information from both regulatory (eco)toxicity studies and mechanistic/screening studies were proposed. These criteria combined the nature of the adverse effects detected in studies which give concern for endocrine toxicity with an understanding of the mode of action of toxicity so that adverse effects can be explained scientifically. A key element in the data evaluation is the consideration of all available information in a weight-of-evidence approach. However, to be able to discriminate chemicals with endocrine properties of low concern from those of higher concern (for regulatory purposes), the task force recognised that the concept needed further refinement. Following a discussion of the key factors at a second workshop of invited regulatory, academic and industry scientists (), the task force developed further guidance, which is presented in this paper. For human health assessments these factors include the relevance to humans of the endocrine mechanism of toxicity, the specificity of the endocrine effects with respect to other potential toxic effects, the potency of the chemical to induce endocrine toxicity and consideration of exposure levels. For ecotoxicological assessments the key considerations include specificity and potency, but also extend to the consideration of population relevance and negligible exposure. It is intended that these complement and reinforce the approach originally described and previously published in this journal (). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The European legislation on plant protection products (Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009) and biocides (Directive 98/8/EC), as well as the regulation concerning chemicals (Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006 ‘REACH’) only support the marketing and use of chemical products on the basis that they do not induce endocrine disruption in humans or non-target species. However, there is currently no agreed guidance on how to identify and evaluate endocrine activity and disruption. Consequently, an ECETOC task force was formed to provide scientific criteria that may be used within the context of these three legislative documents. Specific scientific criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties that integrate information from both regulatory (eco)toxicity studies and mechanistic/screening studies are proposed. These criteria combine the nature of the adverse effects detected in studies which give concern for endocrine toxicity with an understanding of the mode of action of toxicity so that adverse effects can be explained scientifically. The criteria developed are presented in the form of flow charts for assessing relevant effects for both humans and wildlife species. In addition, since not all chemicals with endocrine disrupting properties are of equal hazard, assessment of potency is also proposed to discriminate chemicals of high concern from those of lower concern. The guidance presented in this paper includes refinements made to an initial proposal following discussion of the criteria at a workshop of invited regulatory, academic and industry scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]