RISK21: Q-KEDRF. ILSI Health and Environmental Sciences Institute

Similar documents
Samuel M. Cohen, M.D., Ph.D. Food Safety Case Study: Arsenic. ILSI North America Southampon, Bermuda January 21, 2014

The use of mode of action information in risk assessment: Quantitative key events/doseresponse

Threshold-Based Risk Assessment is the Same for Cancer and Non-cancer Endpoints for Non-DNA Reactive Carcinogens

Thought Starter Combined Exposures to Multiple Chemicals Second International Conference on Risk Assessment

A Weight of Evidence Approach to Cancer Assessment. Alan R Boobis Imperial College London

Case Study Application of the WHO Framework for Combined Exposures. Presented by: M.E. (Bette) Meek University of Ottawa

Application of the WHO Framework for Combined Exposures; Implications for Combined Exposures Assessment

Dose Response Approaches for Nuclear Receptor Mediated Modes of Action Workshop Preliminary Report

Report of a Workshop on Dose-Response Approaches for Nuclear Receptor- Mediated Modes of Action

DISCUSSION GROUP 3. Mechanism of carcinogenicity. EFSA Scientific Colloquium on Acrylamide carcinogenicity, 22/23 May

The world of chemicals

Read Across with Metabolomics for Phenoxy Herbicides a Case Study with MCPP BASF SE

Arsenic-induced bladder cancer in an animal model

EFSA Scientific Colloquium No. 17, June 2012, Parma, Italy. Dieter Schrenk Food Chemistry and Toxicology University of Kaiserslautern 2012

The Primary Prevention of Asthma

Research Framework for Evaluating the Potential Mode(s)

Application of human epidemiological studies to pesticide risk assessment

Consideration of Reproductive/Developmental Mode of Action Data from Laboratory Animals in the Risk Assessment of Environmental Chemicals

Mechanisms of Action for Arsenic in Cardiovascular Toxicity and Implications for Risk Assessment

Summary 255 Research Summary

Overview of US EPA Assessment Activities for Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS)

Distinguishing between Mode and Mechanism of Action

Uncertainties in Dietary Exposure Analysis A Challenge to Be Addressed

SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON TOXICITY, ECOTOXICITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT (CSTEE) Opinion on the results of the Risk Assessment of:

A Novel Bottom Up Approach to Bounding Potential Human Cancer Risks from Endogenous Chemicals

Susceptible Populations Workshop January 20-21, 2010 Greenbelt, MD

Biomarkers of acrylamide

Development of criteria for the selection of markers for use in nutrition research: Follow-up of the ILSI Europe Marker Validation Initiative

Uncertainty Characterization: The Role of Hypothesis-Based Weight of Evidence"

PHENOXY HERBICIDES CASE STUDY CONSIDERED IN CONTEXT OF ECHA RAAF

Genome Editing Research for Translational Toxicology Solutions

A Speciation Study focused on the Identification of Proximate Toxic Arsenic Metabolites. Kazuo T. Suzuki

TRENDS IN EXPOSURE AND IN LEVELS IN HUMAN MILK

Low dose effect Alan R Boobis Imperial College London ILSI Europe March 2014 Annual Symposium Brussels, Belgium

Status of Activities on BPA

Dithianon DITHIANON (180)

Workshop overview: Arsenic research and risk assessment

Risk Characterization

FORMALDEHYDE IRIS ASSESSMENT JANUARY 24, 2018

AGRICULTURAL CHEMICAL SAFETY ASSESSMENT (ACSA)

DANIEL R. DOERGE U.S. Food and Drug Administration National Center for Toxicological Research Jefferson, AR

Expert Statement on Metofluthrin (CLH Report, Version 2 of May 2015). Professor Brian G. Lake, Centre for Toxicology, University of Surrey,

pesticides in the EU regulatory framework Prof Andreas Kortenkamp

5.3 AZINPHOS METHYL (002)

Minutes of EFSA-ANSES Expert Meeting on Bisphenol A (BPA) Art. 30 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 Held on 3 December 2014, Paris (France)

OPINION of the French Agency for Environmental and Occupational Health Safety

Dose-Response Assessment for Arsenic: A Case Study for Why the LNT Doesn t Work

PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF DATA DOSSIERS TO JMPR BY MANUFACTURERS. Dr Caroline A Harris and Cecilia Gaston Exponent International Ltd, UK

EFSA working group on BPA assessment protocol. Ursula Gundert-Remy Chair of the EFSA Working Group BPA assessment Protocol

IPCS Conceptual Framework for Evaluating a Mode of Action for Chemical Carcinogenesis

Hexavalent Chromium Oral Reference Dose

Dr. Abeer.c.Yousif. Histology -2 nd stage. What is histology?

5. Summary of Data Reported and Evaluation

Thresholds of Toxicological Concern

Glyphosate Hazard and Risk Assessment: A Comparison of the Approaches of Two International Agencies

The potential impact of toxicogenomics on modern chemical risk assessment 3-MCPD and 3-MCPD fatty acid esters as examples

The Chronic Cancer Bioassay Is Frequently Conducted for Pesticides When It Is Not Always Needed to Protect Human Health

Arsenic as a Human Health Hazard: Highlights of Recent Epidemiologic Findings

Challenges of MoA/HRF under CLH

Case Study Summary: Appendix: Evaluation of Hazard Range for Three Additional Chemicals: Tetrachloroethylene, Chromium (VI) and Arsenic.

ESTIMATING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ARSENIC EXPOSURE THROUGH RICE CONSUMPTION AND DISEASE. Andrew Ethan Yosim

A Framework for Human Relevance Analysis of Information on Carcinogenic Modes of Action

Normal Morphology. Anatomic Considerations. Normal Urothelial Histology and Cytology

The Flin Flon area includes Flin Flon and Channing, Manitoba, and, Flin Flon and Creighton, Saskatchewan

Gyan Rai, PhD 06/04/2015

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS IN VIRUS-ASSOCIATED HUMAN CANCERS

5/21/2018. Prostate Adenocarcinoma vs. Urothelial Carcinoma. Common Differential Diagnoses in Urological Pathology. Jonathan I.

A Structure Activity Relationship (SAR) Based Case Study for a Cosmetic Ingredient

5.36 THIOPHANATE-METHYL (077)

DANIEL R. DOERGE U.S. Food and Drug Administration National Center for Toxicological Research Jefferson, AR

VIGORBITAL. A new Food Supplement aimed at improving energy yielding metabolism, muscle and cardiac functions, and protein synthesis

Key Aspects of U.S. EPA s External Review Draft Toxicological Review of Trichloroethylene (TCE)

Design of Experiments & Introduction to Research

CPH601 Chapter 3 Risk Assessment

Risk Assessment of Chemicals in Foods- WHO Principles and Methods

Histology Notes -Part 1: Epithelial Tissues

BY CARL K. WINTER, ELIZABETH A. JARA, AND JAMES R. COUGHLIN. Assessing and Understanding ARSENIC EXPOSURE

Evaluation of active substances in plant protection products Residues Anja Friel European Food Safetey Authority, Parma/ Italy

OpenFoodTox and Other Open Source In silico EFSA. Jean Lou Dorne Senior Scientific Officer Scientific Committee and Emerging Risks Unit EFSA

Introduction. Dietary Exposure Assessment Tools for Prioritizing Food Safety Concerns. Workshop on. Stephen S. Olin

Unit I Problem 9 Histology: Basic Tissues of The Body

Biomarkers in Public Health: Development and Applications

EFSA work on Cumulative Risk Assessment of pesticides. Luc Mohimont EFSA Pesticides Unit EuroMix Project 20/05/2015

Addendum to the 12th Report on Carcinogens

STUDIES TO EVALUATE THE SAFETY OF RESIDUES OF VETERINARY DRUGS IN HUMAN FOOD: GENERAL APPROACH TO ESTABLISH AN ACUTE REFERENCE DOSE

CUMULATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT OF PESTICIDES TO HUMAN HEALTH: THE WAY FORWARD

Mandates of the FQPA. ES/RP 532 Applied Environmental Toxicology. Tolerance. Mandate of FIFRA. FQPA Mandate. How Tolerance Is Developed

Assessing Risks for Inhalation and Ingestion of Pollutants

CONTRASTS AND INTERACTIONS

What is a cause? Dr Brendan Clarke. UCL Department of Science and Technology Studies

9/26/2016. The Impact of Dietary Protein on the Musculoskeletal System. Research in dietary protein, musculoskeletal health and calcium economy

BRAFO methodology and application to the case studies

Cancer Epidemiology, Manifestations, and Treatment

Types of bladder cancer

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

ToxStrategies, Inc. and Summit Toxicology

Supplementary Table. Overview of IPCS requirements for analyzing cancer mode of action. Metofluthrin 1 Momfluorothrin 2

Section 5.3: Preclinical safety data

Political Science 15, Winter 2014 Final Review

Transcription:

RISK21: Q-KEDRF ILSI Health and Environmental Sciences Institute

Mode of Action 3 Risk / Safety In vivo In vitro 4 Toxicity QSAR/ TTC Matrix Biomonitoring 2 Probabilistic Deterministic Minimal Info Exposure Problem Formulation 1 Conclude

Mode of Action In vivo 3 Risk / Safety Dose-response for mode of action, Key Events Dose Response Framework (KEDRF) 4 In vitro Toxicity QSAR/ TTC Matrix Biomonitoring 2 Probabilistic Deterministic Minimal Info Exposure Problem Formulation 1 Conclude

Modulating Factors Host factors Genetic variation (e.g. GST polymorphism) Disease/ill-health (e.g. chronic kidney disease) Defense mechanisms (e.g. immune responsiveness) Physiology (e.g. life stage) Lifestyle Diet (e.g. calorie intake) Tobacco Alcohol Exercise Medication (e.g. CYP inhibitors) Illegal drugs Dietary supplements (e.g. anti-oxidants) Environment Co-exposures (e.g. dust, water contaminants)

Critical data gaps identified Critical data gaps identified Quantitative KEDRF (Q-KEDRF) Mode of Action/Human Relevance Framework (Meek et al, 2014) Problem formulation Hypothesized mode of action (key events) based on Bradford Hill considerations Adverse effect Mode of action Key events Assessment specific data generation Assessment specific data generation Not relevant Level of confidence Qualitative and quantitative human concordance Level of confidence Implications for risk assessment B2. Which putative Key Events can be identified unequivocally? Are any Key Events represented by an Associative Event? B3. What is the dose response and temporal relationship between the Key Events and the apical event? B1. Use current methodologies, e.g., Margin of Exposure (MOE), on the most Appropriate endpoint Dose-Response and Temporality of Key Events (pathways) B4. What are the Modulating Factors for Key Events of the human dose response? How do the Key Events and their Modulating Factors vary within the human population? DOSE-RESPONSE (Most relevant apical event) B5. Use quantitative dose response analysis to understand species differences with the goal of developing human toxicity criteria based on the MOA

Example: Dimethylarsinic Acid (DMA) DMA III (Metabolite) Urothelial Toxicity Regenerative Proliferation Hyperplasia Bladder Tumors SUSTAINED Formation of the reactive metabolite trivalent DMA (DMA III ) Cytotoxicity within the superficial epithelial layer of the urinary bladder Regenerative proliferation Urothelial hyperplasia (Bladder tumors)

Dose-time concordance table for DMAIII

Dose-response species concordance EVENT OR FACTOR QUALITATIVE CONCORDANCE Animals Humans Concordance QUANTITATIVE CONCORDANCE AND QUANTITATIVE DOSE-RESPONSE Str.* Animals Humans Key Event #1 Metabolism to DMA III DMA III detected in urine following 26 weeks treatment with 100 ppm DMA V Evidence following DMA V exposure too limited to draw conclusions, but DMA III shown to be present following human exposure to ias KEY EVENTS Plausible +/- NA DMA III in urine (mm) 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Dose of DMA V (mg/kg/d) Key Event #2 Urothelial Cytotoxicity Urothelial toxicity observed in vivo in rats at 2 ppm but not enough for successive key events Potential to occur in humans but unknown if sufficient DMA III formed Plausible +/- NA DMA III in urine (mm) 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 3 weeks 0.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Dose of DMA V (mg/kg/d) 10 weeks Key Event #3 Urothelial Proliferation observed at 0.5 mg/kg/d DMA V Potential to occur in humans but unknown if sufficient DMA III formed Plausible +/- 5 NA Proliferation at 10 weeks (fold change) 4 3 2 1 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Dose of DMA V (mg/kg/d) *Str. = strength

Dose-response species concordance EVENT OR FACTOR QUALITATIVE CONCORDANCE QUANTITATIVE CONCORDANCE AND QUANTITATIVE DOSE-RESPONSE Key Event #4 Hyperplasia Apical Event Tumors Animals Humans Concordance observed at 2 mg/kg/d or 0.3 to 2 mmol DMA III in urine observed at 5 mg/kg/d DMA V or 0.8 to 5.05 mmol DMA III in urine Potential to occur in humans but unknown if sufficient DMA III formed No data in humans Str.* Animals Humans KEY EVENTS Plausible +/- NA Concordance cannot be made because there is no human data Frequency of Hyperplasia at 10 weeks 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Dose of DMA V (mg/kg/d) - NA Frequency of Bladder Tumors (2 yr) 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 5 10 15 Dose of DMA V (mg/kg/d) *Str. = strength

SUSTAINED Q-KEDRF and RISK21 Matrix DMA III (Metabolite) Urothelial Toxicity Regenerative Proliferation Hyperplasia Bladder Tumors

Conclusions High quality D-R data for both KEs and the apical event are needed Which KEs can be unequivocally identified as such? Both the position and steepness of the D-R should be considered MFs need to be taken into account relative to dose levels of interest Quantitative DR of KEs can provide much information about the MOA

Thank you Questions welcome