The Inhalation DNEL- Challenge

Similar documents
A weight-of-evidence approach for setting OELs for poorly soluble, low-toxicity nanoparticles

Presenting Uncertainty in the Context of Toxicological, Biological Monitoring and Exposure Information. William H.

State of Science for Respiratory Sensitization

CHARACTERIZING THE IMPACTS OF UNCERTAINTY AND SCIENTIFIC JUDGMENT IN EXPOSURE LIMIT DEVELOPMENT

TNsG on Annex I Inclusion Revision of Chapter 4.1: Quantitative Human Health Risk Characterisation

Development of NJ Human Health-based Criteria and Standards

APPLICATION FOR AUTHORISATION: ESTABLISHING REFERENCE DNELs FOR 1-BROMOPROPANE (1-BP)

OECD GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR THE DERIVATION OF AN ACUTE REFERENCE CONCENTRATION (ARfC) Revision History

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

The Director General Maisons-Alfort, 30 July 2018 OPINION. of the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety

Robert G. Sussman, Ph.D., DABT Managing Principal, Eastern Operations. SafeBridge Consultants, Inc. Mountain View, CA New York, NY Liverpool, UK

Introduction to principles of toxicology and risk assessment

Step by Step Approach for GPS Risk Assessment

Zinc: Issues and Update. Craig Boreiko, Ph.D. Ottawa May 2008

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

Risk Assessment Report on Tris (nonylphenyl)phosphite (TNPP)

TLVs for Nanoparticles. Terry Gordon, PhD Chair, TLV Committee

Ethylene Oxide

Rationale for TEL, WES and NOAEC values for ethanedinitrile, Draft 1

Data Package of the Peer Consultation Meeting on the Chloroacetanilide Degradates. May 11 th 12 th, Northern Kentucky University, METS Center

alternative short-chain fluorinated product technology

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality

Substance Evaluation Conclusion document EC No SUBSTANCE EVALUATION CONCLUSION DOCUMENT. as required by REACH Article 48.

FDA Expectations and Evaluation of Inhalation Toxicology Studies

Risk Assessment Approaches for Nanomaterials

TRIS (NONYLPHENYL) PHOSPHITE SUMMARY RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT

ICH Topic S1C(R2) Dose Selection for Carcinogenicity Studies of Pharmaceuticals. Step 5

SILICA, CRYSTALLINE (RESPIRABLE DUST)

The Scientific Rationale for Deriving Database and Toxicodynamic Uncertainty Factors for Reproductive or Developmental Toxicants

APPLICATION FOR AUTHORISATION: ESTABLISHING REFERENCE DNELS FOR BBP

N-Methylneodecanamide (MNDA)

ENV 455 Hazardous Waste Management

CHAPTER 7 TOXICITY ASSESSMENT

IS AMBIENT HYDROGEN SULFIDE A RISK TO HUMAN HEALTH? Sarah R. Armstrong, M.S., D.A.B.T. Michael R. Ames, Sc.D. and Laura C. Green, Ph.D., D.A.B.T.

Human health effects of antimony an update

Assessment of Potential Risk Levels Associated with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Reference Values

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Dermal Occupational Exposure Limits. Their use in risk assessment

Proactive Integration of Occupational Toxicology Assessments into the Drug Development Process

Distinguishing between Mode and Mechanism of Action

What are the challenges in addressing adjustments for data uncertainty?

PQRI PODP Extractables & Leachables Workshop Leachable Evaluation of a Container Closure System - What to do When Above the Threshold

Methodologies for development of human health criteria and values for the lake Erie drainage basin.

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

Development of safe levels of elemental impurities

Tetrachloroethylene: Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Draft Toxicological Review Kate Z. Guyton, PhD DABT

Strategies for health interpretation: development of HBM healthbased guidance values for individual phthalates and BPA

DOSE SELECTION FOR CARCINOGENICITY STUDIES OF PHARMACEUTICALS *)

CASE STUDY A Carcinogenic Effect Level for Methylene Chloride

Original article: Thomas Schupp

Summary. Scope. Physical and chemical properties

Mathematical Framework for Health Risk Assessment

Substance Evaluation Conclusion document EC No SUBSTANCE EVALUATION CONCLUSION DOCUMENT. as required by REACH Article 48.

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Toxicology. Toxicity. Human Health Concerns. Health Effects of Hazardous Materials

CHEMICAL SAFETY REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Committee for Risk Assessment RAC. Opinion on scientific evaluation of occupational exposure limits for. Nickel and its compounds

OPINION of the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety

Guidelines to Develop Inhalation and Oral Cancer and Non-Cancer Toxicity Factors. Chapters 1-6. Draft June 7, 2011 DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

Considerations in Toxicology Study Design and Interpretation: An Overview Gradient Corporation: Lewis, AS; Beyer, LA; Langlois, CJ; Yu, CJ; Wait, AD

(Z)-1-Chloro-2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (2017)

Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment R.8: Characterisation of dose [concentration] - response for human health

Human Health Risk Assessment Overview [For the APS/OPP Roundtable]

Cycloxydim CYCLOXYDIM (179)

Joint Task Force. ECHA Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) and. Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (SCOEL)

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Action Levels and Allergen Thresholds What they will mean for the Food Industry Dr. Rachel WARD r.ward consultancy limited

Environmental Risk Assessment Toxicity Assessment

Current status of Benchmark Dose Modeling for 3-Monochloropropane-1,2-diol (3-MCPD)

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

5.15 HEXYTHIAZOX (176)

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

IMPURITIES: GUIDELINE FOR RESIDUAL SOLVENTS PDE FOR CUMENE

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

TTC NON-CANCER ORAL DATABASES

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

Challenges in environmental risk assessment (ERA) for birds and mammals and link to endocrine disruption (ED) Katharina Ott, BASF SE, Crop Protection

Guidelines to Develop Effects Screening Levels, Reference Values, and Unit Risk Factors

A Primer on Acute Inhalation Toxicity Testing

Stakeholders consultations on Info Cards and Brief Profiles

Topic 3.13 Use of NOAEL, benchmark dose, and other models for human risk assessment of hormonally active substances*,

b Public Consultation on Aspartame: ISA COMMENTS

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Evaluation of Swimming Pool Treatment Chemicals Health Effects under NSF/ANSI Standard 50

The role of expert judgement and conceptual approaches in setting OELs by the German MAK commission

New Pesticide Fact Sheet

Approaches to Integrating Evidence From Animal and Human Studies in Chemical Assessments

Science, Hazard and Risk in the European Union: The Case of TiO 2 Exposures

5.36 THIOPHANATE-METHYL (077)

3-MCPD and glycidol and their esters

Considerations for Inhalation Safety Assessment: Approaches and Application

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

APPENDIX K - Exposure Limits For Uranium

Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC)

Name of Chemical: Etoxazole Reason for Issuance: Conditional Registration Date Issued: August 2002

MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET

Health and Vegetation Based Effect Screening Values for Ethylene Neeraja (Neera) Erraguntla, Ph.D., DABT and Roberta Grant, Ph.D.

Committee for Risk Assessment RAC

Update on PBTK model-based derivation of HBM-1 values for ethylene glycol monoethyl ether (acetate)

Transcription:

The Inhalation DNEL- Challenge Jürgen Pauluhn Rome, October 1, 2010 Wuppertal, Germany

First Step of Risk Characterization: Reference Concentration for Workers DNEL = derived no effect level - the level of exposure above which humans should not be exposed - DNELs are for threshold effects - the basis of derivation is a NEL or a POD. - When no DNEL can be obtained (non-threshold effect or no threshold is identifiable) a DMEL should be derived. Limited operational guidance is given. DMEL = derived minimal effect level - expresses an exposure level corresponding to a low risk - excess lifetime risk: how many excess cases in absolute terms will result from a given relative estimate of risk. - cancer risk levels of 10-5 and 10-6 could be seen as indicative tolerable risk levels when setting DMELs for workers and the general population, respectively

The Principles of Derivations of NOAEL HEC, POD HEC and DNEL Analysis of data base and selection of most appropriate study to fit the purpose - Most relevant species & study design - Lowest dose descriptor from all studies accessible - Substance-specific data allow modified procedure Purpose - Protection of pre-defined population (consumer, workers) - Most apt exposure regimen and route - Most critical and relevant mode of action (MOA: local, systemic with or without metabolism/toxicophoresis) Selection of dose descriptor - NEL/NOAEL from default study - MOA-based specialized study

Diversity of Inhalation Toxicity not appreciated Categorization irritants vs. corrosives ( similar as eyes and skin ) too simple / clarification needed Differentiation between sensory and cytotoxic irritants too simple / clarification needed No tests available for respiratory tract irritation too simple / clarification needed OECD-GD#39 (2009) provides a great deal of guidance Compartmentalization of respiratory tract REACH: Respiratory system All other: differentiation into NP-, TBand P-region Relative Change to Control Period [%] 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 air irritant Respiratory Minute Volume - Rats 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 Time [minutes] air control - wet 100 mg/m³ - wet 200 mg/m³ - wet 400 mg/m³ - wet 1000 mg/m³ - wet 1000 mg/m³ - aerosol Pre-exposure ref. Sigmoidal function Misconception: neuronal efferents are flux-dependent; however injury is concentration x time dependent.

Local Effects: Irritation of the Respiratory System Stratified: US-NOAEL-HEC NH All together: EU-DNEL 3 COCl 2 NP TB P

DNEL: Related Approaches US-Iris-RfC concept (general public) NOAEL HEC ( POD HEC ) = NOAELADJ ( PODADJ ) UF H UF A DAF UF UF S L UF D DAF: Dosimetric adjustment factor, which differ for vapors and aerosols and is dependent on the substance-specific mode of action (MOA) NOAEL ADJ = adjustment of exposure durations study & population 700 POD Benchmark UF H 10 UF A 3 UF S 3 UF L 1 UF D 1 NOAEL LOAEL BMDL (POD) Collagen [mg/l] y Collagen = a*[c-(c-1)*exp(-b*x)] 600 500 400 300 200 100 BMC: 0.27 mg/m³; BMCL (95%): 0.20 mg/m³ 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Key study: 90-day inhalation study on rats with borderline NOAEL Concentration [mg/m³]

DNEL: Default Approach for Workers (OELs) DNEL( POD) = NOAEL ADJ ( POD ADJ ) Systemic or Local ( ± metabol.) AF AF AF AF AF H A S L D RfC: Regional-specific dosimetric adjustments DNEL: Entire respiratory system with distinction of sensory/cytotoxic irritation Dose expression: C, effect-based C x t and cumulative C x t ill-addressed Route to route: unclear and inconsistent with all other regulations, e.g. pharmaceuticals Read-across: regulatory acceptance yet unclear POD Benchmark UF H 5 UF A 2.5 UF S 2 13-wk (6) 4-wk UF L 1 UF D 1 Inhalation: local Key study: 90-day inhalation study on rats MOA-studies of short duration Acute-on-chronic effects Accumulation Allometric scaling (oral inhalation) Default AF tot -local irritant/4 wk rat study: 75

Derived No Effect Level: The Purpose is to derive an OEL Newly developed health benchmark for risk management decisions (RCR): Selection of Scenario consumer/worker Selection of key study fitting the MOA & scenario Adjustment of dose descriptor to the scenario Calculate DNEL Case-by-case dosimetric/morphometric adjustments Select assessment factors RCR = Expos./DNEL (< 1 safe use) Expert judgment based on substance-specific information

Time Adjustments & Mode of Action Exposure adjustment: long-term Exposure adjustment: short-term 100 LCt 01 [mg/m³ x min] 1e+6 1e+5 C 2 x t = const. effect LC 01 [mg/m³ x min] 1e+5 1e+4 Lung Burden [mg Substance resp /kg rat ] 80 E D =10 mg resp /day - t 1/2 = 10 days 60 40 E D =10 mg resp /day - t 1/2 = 2 days 20 E D =10 mg resp /day - t 1/2 = 0.5 days 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Study Day 5 1e+3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1e+4 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 Time [min] Time [min] Dose required to elicit a constant effect vs. exposure frequency related accumulation of dose. Acute-on-chronic effects important to consider. Lung Burden [µl Substance resp /kg rat ] 4 3 2 1 N i= 1 k i i + t D = D ( 1 e ) D 0.07 µl/m³ - 2 yr (100% steady-state) 0.07 µl/m³ - 13 weeks (67% steady-state) 0.07 µl/m³ - 4 weeks (28% steady-state) 0.07 µl/m³ - 5 days (8% steady-state) Lung overload threshold = NO(A)EL 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Study Day 0

Local acute alveolar Irritation: Example Phosgene Key study Worker -DNEL: 1 DNEL = 0.3mg / m³[8h / d, POD] default 13-week rat 5 2.5 2 3 1 inhalation study = 0.004 mg / m³(0.001 ppm) H A S L D Worker OEL / weight of evidence: DNEL= 9 [ mg/ m³ 30min] = 0.4mg / m³(0.1 ppm) 270 480 1 H 1 A 1 1 S 1 L 1 D 1x30 min dog MOA inhalation study + 13-week rat inhalation study Current workplace standards: MAK/TLV: 0.4 mg/m³ (0.1 ppm) Ceiling (MAK): x2 100-times higher than the DNEL default

Acute and (sub)chronic Effects: Example Phosgene Gas Relative Change to Control [%] 1e+5 1e+4 1e+3 BAL-Protein 1x6h - Rat (Hatch et al., 2001) 1x4h - Rat (Pauluhn, 2006b) 1x30min - Rat (Pauluhn, 2006b) control data (100%) Upper specification Exposures >10 min Exposures - 10 min Mortality 100 80 60 40 20 Mortality [%] 600 500 400 300 200 100 C x t [mg/m³ x min] 1e+2 100 1000 Concentration x Time [mg/m³ x min] (LCt 01 ) 0 0 Acute-rat 13 wks-rat Acute-dog Human BAL-protein (NOAEL) Histopath ( NOAEL) BAL-protein (NOAEL) Onset of clinically manifest edema Mode of action: MOA-based key study C n=1 x t = const. Acute on chronic effect (this means the chronic NOAEL is driven by acute P-irritation Dog data supersede rat data

Route-to-Route Extrapolation Dose = RMV x C x t RMV-rat young-adult nose-only exposure: 0.8 L/(min x kg) or 0.29 m³/kg-day 172 mg/m³ double correction RMV-human working day 10 m³/70 kg: 0.14 m³/kg-day 25 mg/kg Algorithms suggested by REACH R.8 are at variance with all other guidelines, e.g. inhalation pharmaceuticals

Systemic acute Methemoglobinemia: Example Aniline H N OH dead-end metabolism 30 inhalation exposure (15 mg/kg) gavage (15 mg/kg) H N OH 25 20 Hb 2+ Hb 3+ N O NADP+ NADPH MetHb [%] 15 10 5 end of inhalation exposure NH 2 RBC 0 0 2 4 6 8 Time [hours] Oral: 5-times more toxic than by inhalation

Aniline Route & Time Dependence of MetHb-Formation MetHb [%] 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 15 mg/m³ 30 mg/m³ 59 mg/m³ 116 mg/m³ 243 mg/m³ prior 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 1d Exposure Duration [hours] No time-adjustment needed below or at effect threshold. Steady-state attained at 30 mg/m³ - 4 hrs exposure (< 1% MetHb)

Aniline Worker -DNEL: Feeding study: (7x7/4)/AF (2.5 x 5 x 3 L ) = 0.3 mg/m³ default Feeding study: (7/0.29/AF (2.5 x 5 x 3 L ) = 0.6 mg/m³ default/modified Feeding study: (7/0.29x5)/AF (2.5 x 5 x 3 L ) = 3.2 mg/m³ expert 2-wk inhalation study: 9.2x6/8/AF (2.5 x 5 x 6 x 2) = 0.05 mg/m³ default 2-wk inhalation study: 9.2/AF (2.5) = 3.7 mg/m³ expert Key study 2-yr rat chronic dietary study (NEL<7 mg/kg/day) Worker DNEL / weight of evidence: 1 DNEL = 30 m 3 1 1 1 1 [ mg / m³ 4h] = 10 mg / ³ H A S L D Single 4-hour dog MOA inhalation study Current workplace standards: MAK/TLV: 8 mg/m³ Ceiling (MAK): x2 2 to 160-times higher than the default DNEL

Default Assessment Factors

Expert-Based Assessment Factors Inhalation studies are triggered if local effects are expected to occur within the respiratory tract. Inhalation studies probe specifically the localized site of injury. Modeling procedures available for rat human dosimetric adjustments. The diversity of the respiratory tract needs to be appreciated in regard to deposition/retained dose and resulting localized dose and effect. Default time-adjustments irrelevant for acute-on-chronic effects. Prorated C x t adjustments need thoughtful considerations in regard to cumulative dose and attainment of steady state.

Summary The NELs from MOA-based on short-term studies are more relevant for DNEL estimations than from default guideline studies. The prorated default time-adjustment does neither take into account the substance-specific MOA nor its kinetic profile. The variability and uncertainties of inhalation studies are lower than from non-inhalation studies. The study design is targeted to meet the exposure patterns of workers. The different locations of the respiratory tract need to be differentiated and thoughtfully adjusted to humans.

Conclusion The endpoint-specific guidance (R.7) needs to be adopted to the updated OECD guidance as of 2009. Risk characterization (R.8) does not adequately appreciate the highly targeted and MOA-driven design of inhalation studies. Most of the criteria given appear to match eye/skin or oral tests but not inhalation toxicity tests. Therefore, the default uncertainty factors articulated by R.8 have to be understood as trigger for undertaking a substance- and MOA-specific RC to arrive at more meaningful and science-based OELs or DNELs.