Search

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a chemical used in the production of numerous consumer products resulting in potential daily human exposure to this chemical. The FDA previously evaluated the body of BPA toxicology data and determined that BPA is safe at current exposure levels. Although consistent with the assessment of some other regulatory agencies around the world, this determination of BPA safety continues to be debated in scientific and popular publications, resulting in conflicting messages to the public. Thus, the National Toxicology Program (NTP), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) developed a consortium-based research program to link more effectively a variety of hypothesis-based research investigations and guideline-compliant safety testing with BPA. This collaboration is known as the Consortium Linking Academic and Regulatory Insights on BPA Toxicity (CLARITY-BPA). This paper provides a detailed description of the conduct of the study and a midterm update on progress of the CLARITY-BPA research program., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

A complete mode of action human relevance analysis--as distinct from mode of action (MOA) analysis alone--depends on robust information on the animal MOA, as well as systematic comparison of the animal data with corresponding information from humans. In November 2003, the International Life Sciences Institute's Risk Science Institute (ILSI RSI) published a 2-year study using animal and human MOA information to generate a four-part Human Relevance Framework (HRF) for systematic and transparent analysis of MOA data and information. Based mainly on non-DNA-reactive carcinogens, the HRF features a "concordance" analysis of MOA information from both animal and human sources, with a focus on determining the appropriate role for each MOA data set in human risk assessment. With MOA information increasingly available for risk assessment purposes, this article illustrates the further applicability of the HRF for reproductive, developmental, neurologic, and renal endpoints, as well as cancer. Based on qualitative and quantitative MOA considerations, the MOA/human relevance analysis also contributes to identifying data needs and issues essential for the dose-response and exposure assessment steps in the overall risk assessment.

CorrectionAfter publication of the article [1], it has been brought to our attention that the thirteenth author of this article has had their name spelt incorrectly. In the original article the spelling "Laura Rizzir" was used. In fact the correct spelling should be "Laura Rizzi".

Summary: Children in America today are at an unacceptably high risk of developing neurodevelopmental disorders that affect the brain and nervous system including autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, intellectual disabilities, and other learning and behavioral disabilities. These are complex disorders with multiple causes—genetic, social, and environmental. The contribution of toxic chemicals to these disorders can be prevented. Approach: Leading scientific and medical experts, along with children’s health advocates, came together in 2015 under the auspices of Project TENDR: Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risks to issue a call to action to reduce widespread exposures to chemicals that interfere with fetal and children’s brain development. Based on the available scientific evidence, the TENDR authors have identified prime examples of toxic chemicals and pollutants that increase children’s risks for neurodevelopmental disorders. These include chemicals that are used extensively in consumer products and that have become widespread in the environment. Some are chemicals to which children and pregnant women are regularly exposed, and they are detected in the bodies of virtually all Americans in national surveys conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The vast majority of chemicals in industrial and consumer products undergo almost no testing for developmental neurotoxicity or other health effects. Conclusion: Based on these findings, we assert that the current system in the United States for evaluating scientific evidence and making health-based decisions about environmental chemicals is fundamentally broken. To help reduce the unacceptably high prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders in our children, we must eliminate or significantly reduce exposures to chemicals that contribute to these conditions. We must adopt a new framework for assessing chemicals that have the potential to disrupt brain development and prevent the use of those that may pose a risk. This consensus statement lays the foundation for developing recommendations to monitor, assess, and reduce exposures to neurotoxic chemicals. These measures are urgently needed if we are to protect healthy brain development so that current and future generations can reach their fullest potential.

We present a detailed response to the critique of "State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals 2012" (UNEP/WHO, 2013) by financial stakeholders, authored by Lamb et al. (2014). Lamb et al.'s claim that UNEP/WHO (2013) does not provide a balanced perspective on endocrine disruption is based on incomplete and misleading quoting of the report through omission of qualifying statements and inaccurate description of study objectives, results and conclusions. Lamb et al. define extremely narrow standards for synthesizing evidence which are then used to dismiss the UNEP/WHO 2013 report as flawed. We show that Lamb et al. misuse conceptual frameworks for assessing causality, especially the Bradford-Hill criteria, by ignoring the fundamental problems that exist with inferring causality from empirical observations. We conclude that Lamb et al.'s attempt of deconstructing the UNEP/WHO (2013) report is not particularly erudite and that their critique is not intended to be convincing to the scientific community, but to confuse the scientific data. Consequently, it promotes misinterpretation of the UNEP/WHO (2013) report by non-specialists, bureaucrats, politicians and other decision makers not intimately familiar with the topic of endocrine disruption and therefore susceptible to false generalizations of bias and subjectivity.

A multidisciplinary group of experts gathered in Parma Italy for a workshop hosted by the University of Parma, May 16-18, 2014 to address concerns about the potential relationship between environmental metabolic disrupting chemicals, obesity and related metabolic disorders. The objectives of the workshop were to: 1. Review findings related to the role of environmental chemicals, referred to as "metabolic disruptors", in obesity and metabolic syndrome with special attention to recent discoveries from animal model and epidemiology studies; 2. Identify conclusions that could be drawn with confidence from existing animal and human data; 3. Develop predictions based on current data; and 4. Identify critical knowledge gaps and areas of uncertainty. The consensus statements are intended to aid in expanding understanding of the role of metabolic disruptors in the obesity and metabolic disease epidemics, to move the field forward by assessing the current state of the science and to identify research needs on the role of environmental chemical exposures in these diseases. We propose broadening the definition of obesogens to that of metabolic disruptors, to encompass chemicals that play a role in altered susceptibility to obesity, diabetes and related metabolic disorders including metabolic syndrome.

BackgroundIncreasing data on early biological changes from chemical exposures requires new interpretation tools to support decision-making.ObjectivesTo test the possibility of applying a quantitative approach using human data linking chemical exposures and upstream biological perturbations to overt downstream outcomes.MethodsUsing polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) exposures and maternal thyroid hormone (TH) perturbations as a case study, we model three relationships: (1) prenatal PCB exposures and TH changes, using free T(4) (FT(4)); (2) prenatal TH and childhood neurodevelopmental outcomes; and (3) prenatal PCB exposures and childhood neurodevelopmental outcomes (IQ). We surveyed the epidemiological literature; extracted relevant quantitative data; and developed models for each relationship, applying meta-analysis where appropriate.ResultsFor relationship 1, a meta-analysis of 3 studies gives a coefficient of -0.27 pg/mL FT(4) per ln(sum of PCBs) (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.82 to 0.27). For relationship 2, regression coefficients from three studies of maternal FT(4) levels and cognitive scores ranged between 0.99 IQ points/(pg/mL FT(4)) (95% CI -0.31 to 2.2) and 7.6 points/(pg/mL FT(4)) (95% CI 1.2 to 16.3). For relationship 3, a meta-analysis of five studies produces a coefficient of -1.98 IQ points (95% CI -4.46 to 0.50) per unit increase in ln(sum of PCBs). Combining relationships 1 and 2 yields an estimate of -2.0 to -0.27 points of IQ per unit increase in ln(sum of PCBs).ConclusionsCombining analysis of chemical exposures and early biological perturbations (PCBs and FT(4)) with analysis of early biological perturbations and downstream overt effects (FT(4) and IQ) yields estimates within the range of studies of exposures and overt effects (PCBs and IQ). This is an example approach using upstream biological perturbations for effect prediction.

There is a growing need for quantitative approaches to extrapolate relationships between chemical exposures and early biological perturbations from animals to humans given increasing use of biological assays to evaluate toxicity pathways. We have developed such an approach using polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and thyroid hormone (TH) disruption as a case study. We reviewed and identified experimental animal literature from which we developed a low-dose, linear model of PCB body burdens and decrements in free thyroxine (FT(4)) and total thyroxine (TT(4)), accounting for 33 PCB congeners; extrapolated the dose-response from animals to humans; and compared the animal dose-response to the dose-response of PCB body burdens and TH changes from eleven human epidemiological studies. We estimated a range of potencies for PCB congeners (over 4 orders of magnitude), with the strongest for PCB 126. Our approach to developing toxic equivalency models produced relative potencies similar to the toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs) from the World Health Organization (WHO). We generally found that the dose-response extrapolated from the animal studies tends to under-predict the dose-response estimated from human epidemiological studies. A quantitative approach to evaluating the relationship between chemical exposures and TH perturbations, based on animal data can be used to assess human health consequences of thyroid toxicity and inform decision-making.

BackgroundAssessing adverse effects from environmental chemical exposure is integral to public health policies. Toxicology assays identifying early biological changes from chemical exposure are increasing our ability to evaluate links between early biological disturbances and subsequent overt downstream effects. A workshop was held to consider how the resulting data inform consideration of an "adverse effect" in the context of hazard identification and risk assessment.ObjectivesOur objective here is to review what is known about the relationships between chemical exposure, early biological effects (upstream events), and later overt effects (downstream events) through three case studies (thyroid hormone disruption, antiandrogen effects, immune system disruption) and to consider how to evaluate hazard and risk when early biological effect data are available.DiscussionEach case study presents data on the toxicity pathways linking early biological perturbations with downstream overt effects. Case studies also emphasize several factors that can influence risk of overt disease as a result from early biological perturbations, including background chemical exposures, underlying individual biological processes, and disease susceptibility. Certain effects resulting from exposure during periods of sensitivity may be irreversible. A chemical can act through multiple modes of action, resulting in similar or different overt effects.ConclusionsFor certain classes of early perturbations, sufficient information on the disease process is known, so hazard and quantitative risk assessment can proceed using information on upstream biological perturbations. Upstream data will support improved approaches for considering developmental stage, background exposures, disease status, and other factors important to assessing hazard and risk for the whole population.

The concept of a threshold of adversity in toxicology is neither provable nor disprovable. As such, it is not a scientific question but a theoretical one. Yet, the belief in thresholds has led to traditional ways of interpreting data derived from regulatory guideline studies of the toxicity of chemicals. This includes, for example, the use of standard "uncertainty factors" when a "No Adverse Effect Level" (or similar "benchmark dose") is either observed, or not observed. In the context of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), this approach is demonstrably inappropriate. First, the efficacy of a hormone on different endpoints can vary by several orders of magnitude. This feature of hormone action also applies to EDCs that can interfere with that hormone. For this reason, we argue that the choice of endpoint for use in regulation is critical, but note that guideline studies were not designed with this in mind. Second, the biological events controlled by hormones in development not only change as development proceeds but are different from events controlled by hormones in the adult. Again, guideline endpoints were also not designed with this in mind, especially since the events controlled by hormones can be both temporally and spatially specific. The Endocrine Society has laid out this logic over several years and in several publications. Rather than being extreme views, they represent what is known about hormones and the chemicals that can interfere with them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The fundamental principle in regulatory toxicology is that all chemicals are toxic and that the severity of effect is proportional to the exposure level. An ancillary assumption is that there are no effects at exposures below the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL), either because no effects exist or because they are not statistically resolvable, implying that they would not be adverse. Chemicals that interfere with hormones violate these principles in two important ways: dose-response relationships can be non-monotonic, which have been reported in hundreds of studies of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs); and effects are often observed below the LOAEL, including all environmental epidemiological studies examining EDCs. In recognition of the importance of this issue, Lagarde et al. have published the first proposal to qualitatively assess non-monotonic dose response (NMDR) relationships for use in risk assessments. Their proposal represents a significant step forward in the evaluation of complex datasets for use in risk assessments. Here, we comment on three elements of the Lagarde proposal that we feel need to be assessed more critically and present our arguments: 1) the use of Klimisch scores to evaluate study quality, 2) the concept of evaluating study quality without topical experts' knowledge and opinions, and 3) the requirement of establishing the biological plausibility of an NMDR before consideration for use in risk assessment. We present evidence-based logical arguments that 1) the use of the Klimisch score should be abandoned for assessing study quality; 2) evaluating study quality requires experts in the specific field; and 3) an understanding of mechanisms should not be required to accept observable, statistically valid phenomena. It is our hope to contribute to the important and ongoing debate about the impact of NMDRs on risk assessment with positive suggestions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are environmental contaminants that persist in environment and human tissues. Perinatal exposure to these endocrine disruptors causes cognitive deficits and learning disabilities in children. These effects may involve their ability to interfere with thyroid hormone (TH) action. We tested the hypothesis that developmental exposure to PCBs can concomitantly alter TH levels and TH-regulated events during cerebral cortex development: progenitor proliferation, cell cycle exit and neuron migration. Pregnant rats exposed to the commercial PCB mixture Aroclor 1254 ended gestation with reduced total and free serum thyroxine levels. Exposure to Aroclor 1254 increased cell cycle exit of the neuronal progenitors and delayed radial neuronal migration in the fetal cortex. Progenitor cell proliferation, cell death and differentiation rate were not altered by prenatal exposure to PCBs. Given that PCBs remain ubiquitous, though diminishing, contaminants in human systems, it is important that we further understand their deleterious effects in the brain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Describes various studies on thyroid toxicology. Discussion of the potential risk of thyroid toxicants on human health; Effects of the environmental synthetic chemicals on thyroid function; Identification of specific end points of thyroid hormone action in developing brain.