Ecopa REACH Animal Use Calculator

Similar documents
Official Journal of the European Union

Webinar: use of alternative methods to animal testing in your REACH registration

Survey results - Analysis of higher tier studies submitted without testing proposals

Roadmap of SVHC identification and implementation of REACH risk management measures 1

ANNEX IX STANDARD INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBSTANCES MANUFACTURED OR IMPORTED IN QUANTITIES OF 100 TONNES OR MORE ( 1 )

Introduction to principles of toxicology and risk assessment

HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT FOR METALLIC CHROMIUM AND TRIVALENT CHROMIUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH EUROPEAN UNION LEGISLATION

Read-across illustrative example

HOW GOOD ARE VALIDATED METHODS TO PREDICT TOXICITY OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF SUBSTANCES AND PRODUCTS?

CATEGORY 4 - Rosin adduct esters UVCB CATEGORY JUSTIFICATION DOCUMENT

Substance Evaluation Conclusion Document EC No SUBSTANCE EVALUATION CONCLUSION. as required by REACH Article 48 and EVALUATION REPORT.

Ian Indans Regulatory scientist Chemicals Regulation Directorate (CRD)

Annex XV. 2,4 - Dinitrotoluene

Pesticide Product Labels What the label says.and Why. Dr. Jeff Birk BASF Corporation Regulatory Manager

RISK MANAGEMENT OPTION ANALYSIS CONCLUSION DOCUMENT

alternative short-chain fluorinated product technology

Trisodium nitrilotriacetate (NTA)

Justification Document for the Selection of a CoRAP Substance

Justification for the selection of a substance for CoRAP inclusion

Step by Step Approach for GPS Risk Assessment

EFSA Info Session Pesticides 26/27 September Anja Friel EFSA Pesticides Unit (Residues team)

Justification for the selection of a candidate CoRAP substance UPDATE

Designing Safety Into Products

1,1 - iminodipropan-2-ol

The effect of REACH implementation on genotoxicity and carcinogenicity testing Jan van Benthem

Assessing the sensitization/irritation properties of micro organisms. Gregorio Loprieno Prevention Medicine Local Health Authority 2 Lucca (Italy)

ASSESSING ENDOCRINE DISRUPTING SUBSTANCES

CHEMICAL SAFETY REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Product: H12MDI (4,4 -Methylene dicyclohexyl diisocyanate; CAS No )

Animal testing versus calculation method

GHS Substance Classifications for SDS Authoring & Labels. Paul Lloyd

Safety Data Sheet according to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006

Official Journal of the European Union. (Non-legislative acts) REGULATIONS

Justification Document for the Selection of a CoRAP Substance

Information Source List Type High (H) Moderate (M) Low (L) GHS Category 1A (Known) or 1B (Presumed) for any route of exposure

Biocidal Products Committee (BPC)

Biocidal Products Committee (BPC)

METHACRYLIC ACID CAS N :

Nickel : one of the strongest documented metal

Assessment of Reproductive Toxicity under REACH July Walter Aulmann

Technical Datasheet LIFTONIN -XPRESS. 1. Application and Storage. Page 1 of 6. Country of Origin. Nature of Raw Materials

N-Methylneodecanamide (MNDA)

Guidance on information requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment. Chapter R.7a: Endpoint specific guidance

First Phase of Impact Assessment on Endocrine Disruptors:

Guidance on use of alternative methods for testing in the safety assessment of cosmetics and quasi-drug

Justification for the selection of a candidate CoRAP substance

How to bring your registration dossier in compliance with REACH Tips and Hints Part 2

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

The official control of the food chain in Hungary

EU regulatory framework for the Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of CHemicals REACH status report

FÜR RISIKOBEWERTUNG BUNDESINSTITUT

Product Safety Summary for Glycerine carbonate

1.2 Relevant identified uses of the substance or mixture and uses advised against Use of the Substance/Mixture : Air care products

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

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

Social dialogue. WG Health, Safety and Responsible Care. CLP Regulation

Justification for the selection of a candidate CoRAP substance

ECPA position paper on the criteria for the determination of endocrine disrupting properties under Regulation

Product: IPDI (Isophorone diisocyanate; CAS No )

Report on the National Pollution Prevention and Toxics Advisory Committee (NPPTAC): The HPV Data Screening Process

Risk Management Option Analysis Conclusion Document

Safety data sheet Issue Date 14-Aug-2017 Revision Date 14-Aug-2017 Version 1. Sodium Sulphate D

Controlling Risk in your Supply Chain - Instruments of Change

Annex II - List of enforceable provisions of REACH and CLP

Biocidal Products Committee (BPC)

The EU PIP - a step in Pediatric Drug Development. Thomas Severin Bonn,

How to bring your registration dossier in compliance with REACH Tips and Hints - Part 5

Residuals/Impurities. Considered Partially Considered Not Considered. Explanation(s) provided. for Residuals/Impurities? Yes No

Comments CLH proposal Cadmium hydroxide

ANIMAL TESTING IN US EPA S CHEMICAL CHALLENGE SCREENING PROGRAM

Justification for the selection of a candidate CoRAP substance

Lead Metal and the 9 th ATP to CLP: Frequently Asked Questions

OECD QSAR Toolbox v.4.2. An example illustrating RAAF scenario 6 and related assessment elements

The Globally Harmonized System of Hazard Classification and Labelling of Chemicals: Critical Aspects for Metals: Human Health

Test guidelines and guidance documents in the field of plant protection products

Update on PVC Stabilisers

WWF's RESPONSE TO THE COMMUNITY STRATEGY FOR ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS

Annex XV Dossier. Sodium dichromate, dihydrate. EC Number: CAS Number:

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

Based on the selected Content Inventory Threshold:

Based on the selected Content Inventory Threshold:

COCAM 3, October 2012 SIDS INITIAL ASSESSMENT PROFILE

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

The BfR Decision Support System (DSS) for Local Lesions

Safety data sheet Issue Date 28-Nov-2016 Revision Date 28-Nov-2016 Version 1. Oxymer M112

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

Residuals/Impurities. Considered Partially Considered Not Considered. Explanation(s) provided. for Residuals/Impurities? Yes No

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

GreenScreen Assessment for [Substituted Amine Phosphate Mixture (CAS# )] Method Version: GreenScreen Version 1.2 1

ANNEX 4 TO FINAL REPORT

Benzothiazole-2-thiol (2-MBT)

The Future of Tin Stabilisers in PVC Applications: Update after Tier 1 Reach Registration

Role of Cat-App in Concawe REACH strategy for human health

Annex XV dossier. PROPOSAL FOR IDENTIFICATION OF A SUBSTANCE AS A CMR CAT 1A OR 1B, PBT, vpvb OR A SUBSTANCE OF AN EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF CONCERN

Safety data sheet according to 1907/2006/EC, Article 31. Printing date Version number 3

Table of Validated and Accepted Alternative Methods

Regulatory need for non-animal approaches for skin sensitisation hazard assessment. Janine Ezendam

Genotoxicity Testing Strategies: application of the EFSA SC opinion to different legal frameworks in the food and feed area

Transcription:

european consensus platform on 3R-alternatives Ecopa REACH Animal Use Calculator Karsten Müller & Simon Webb

Apply the Same Principle as Today... Data Collection Classification, Labelling and SDS Risk Assessment Risk Management Ban Restriction Marketing

but Bigger Scope Today REACH ~3,000 new substances in the EU ~140 existing chemicals (>1000t/y) Regulatory Evaluation 3,140 substances New and existing substances >1t/y/manufacturer or importer Regulatory Evaluation 30,000 substances

Until now and Much Quicker 1981 1993 2006 Not yet finished 25 years for 3,140 substances REACH Start of REACH 2008 2025 End of REACH 17 years for 30,000 substances

and has Sparked a Debate!

Principle of the Calculator REACH Test Requirements Test Protocols Availability of Existing Data Projected Need to Test

REACH Test Requirements OECD 404 Acute Dermal Irritation/Corrosion: Standard Annex VI VIII (>10, >100 & >1000 tonnes)

OECD Test Protocols OECD 404 Acute Dermal Irritation/Corrosion: 1 3 animals

Data Availability/Actual Testing Need OECD 404 Acute Dermal Irritation/Corrosion Annex VI (>10 t) Data Available 65% Testing Required 11% (Pedersen et al., 2003)

Projected Animal Use OECD 404 Acute Dermal Irritation/Corrosion Annex VI 1,642-5,226 animals Annex VII 812-2,436 animals Annex VIII 162 568 animals # Tests 872 2,743

Use of the Calculator

Modification of Assumptions Substance Number, Test Requirement, Data Availability & Animal Number per Test

Graphical Output

1-10t/y (Annex V) Skin Corrosion/Irritation (assessment or in vitro) Eye Irritation (assessment or in vitro) Bacterial Gene Mutation Skin Sensitization (LLNA) Acute Oral Toxicity Source: Council Common Position December 13 th 2005

10-100 t/y (Annex VI) Those tests already mentioned for 1-10 t/y and: In vivo Skin Irritation In vivo Eye Irritation In vitro Cytogenicity Test in Mammalian Cells In vitro Gene Mutation Test in Mammalian Cells Acute Toxicity (2nd route) 28 day Repeat Dose Study Reproductive & Developmental Screening Study Acute Aquatic Toxicity-Fish Source: Council Common Position December 13 th 2005

100-1000 t/y (Annex VII) Those tests already mentioned for 10-100 t/y and: 90 day Sub-Chronic Toxicity Study Developmental Toxicity Study (one species) Two-Generation Reproductive Study Fish Early-life Stage, Embryo or Juvenile Growth Test Bioconcentration in one Aquatic Species (Fish) Source: Council Common Position December 13 th 2005

>1000 t/y (Annex VIII) Those tests already mentioned for 100-1000t/y and if appropriate: Further Mutagenicity Test Long-term Repeat Dose Study Carcinogenicity Study Long-term Reproductive Toxicity to Birds Source: Council Common Position December 13 th 2005

Overall Data Requirements No. of chemicals 1-10 tpa Annex V Limited data + in vitro 10-100 tpa Annex VI (~Base Set) 100-1000 tpa Annex VII 1000 + tpa Annex VIII 17500 5000 2500 2700 Animal Use

Key Input Assumptions Calculator is highly dependent upon input assumptions Data availability and testing need is taken from ECB JRC (Pedersen et al., 2003) Data availability is based on US EPA and ICCA HPV, IUCLID, VCI Voluntary Initiative etc. Two default scenarios with Standard tests: Available Data (AD) & Reduced Data Need (RDN) Available Data assumes that data is required in all cases if it does not exist already ( tick-box ) Reduced Data Need assumes that testing is required for a subset of substances based on application of read-across, grouping, (Q)SAR, exposure-based waiving etc.

Comparison of Scenarios (Standard Tests Only) Available Data Scenario Annex V 2% Reduced Data Need Scenario Annex V 4% Annex VIII 39% Annex VI 16% Annex VII 43% Annex VIII 64% Annex VI 13% Annex VII 19% 16.21 Million Animals 4.52 Million Animals 7.00 Million Animals (- pups) 1.45 Million Animals (- pups)

Available Data Scenario 2% Early Life Stage Fish Repro/Developmental Toxicity Screening Sensitisation LLNA 12% 4% Developmental Toxicity 17% Bioaccumulation Total 16.21 million 3% Acute Inhalation Toxicity Repeated Dose 90d Repeated Dose 28d 55% Other 2-Generation Reproductive Toxicity

Available Data Scenario Total 16.21 million Animal Use Reduced Data Need Scenario Test # Repeated Dose 28d Repeated Dose 90d 3,982 4,614 Acute Inhalation Toxicity 6,672 Bioaccumulation 4,182 Early Life Stage Fish 4,614 Developmental Toxicity 4,127 Sensitisation LLNA Repro/Developmental Toxicity Screening 2-Generation Reproductive Toxicity 23,284 4,131 4,290 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000 10,000,000

Reduced Animal Data Use by Need Endpoint Scenario Total 4.52 million 71% Repro/Developmental Toxicity Screening 10% Sensitisation LLNA 6% 4% 3% Developmental Toxicity Early Life Stage Fish Bioaccumulation Acute Inhalation Toxicity Repeated Dose 90d Repeated Dose 28d Other 2-Generation Reproductive Toxicity

Reduced Data Need Scenario Total 4.52 million Repeated Dose 28d Animal Use Reduced Data Need Scenario Test # 846 Repeated Dose 90d 644 Acute Inhalation Toxicity 1,463 Bioaccumulation 539 Early Life Stage Fish 258 Developmental Toxicity 2,403 Sensitisation LLNA Repro/Developmental Toxicity Screening 2-Generation Reproductive Toxicity 10,404 896 1,542 0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000

2-Generation Reproductive Toxicity Data availability and test need from Pedersen et al. (2003) Largest number of animals for a single endpoint Calculator default includes pups so total animals per test are 2080 versus 320 Regulatory grey area 3.2 million animals or 71% in Reduced Data Need Scenario (1,542 tests) 493,000 8.9 million or 55% in Available Data Scenario (4,290 tests) 1,372,000

2-Generation Reproductive Toxicity Annex VIII Annex (>1000 Annex VII Tonnes) (>100 VI (>10 Tonnes) Tonnes) Availability Availability Availability 26% 7% 3% Test Need Test 47% Need Test 11% Need 12% Assumes Assumes Assumes collective trigger trigger to to waiving test of from test certain Repeat from Repeat Dose Dose classes studies studies of compounds at approx. at approx. 15% 15% (e.g., Possible petroleum Possible underestimate classified estimate listed as a as under- compounds as carcinogenic Standard Potential etc.) test inbut not Council included Common in Reduced PositionData Need Additional 1.2 million?

Reproductive Toxicity Need to focus here (and other endpoints with high projected animal use) to refine predictions AND as priority for Intelligent Testing Strategies (ITS) ITS for Reproductive Toxicity proposed in RIP 3.3 Tiered Approach in ILSI/HESI Agricultural Chemical Safety Assessment (ACSA) ReProtect aims to develop a suite of in vitro tests corresponding to the key components in the reproductive cycle (FP6 supported project)

Mandatory Sharing of Vertebrate Data Pre-reg. Pre-reg. Pre-reg. Reg. Registration Registration Evaluation Evaluation Testing Window (5.5 years) Testing Window Evaluation Testing Window (15.5 years) Testing Window (9.5 years) >1000t/y + CMR 1&2 +R50/53 >100t/y >1-100t/y + substances intentionally released from articles 2024 Q2 >100-1000t/y +R50/53 1-100t/y 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Animal Use Trend under REACH Animal Number per Annum 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 Annex V, VI, VII & VIII 5.5 Years 665,000 Per annum Annex V, VI & VII 4 Years 141,000 Per annum Annex V & VI 6 Years 49,000 Per annum Reduced Data Need Scenario Total 4.52 million Toxicological Safety Testing Industry + Household + Cosmetics 4 th Report on Animal Numbers COM(2005) 7 100,000 142,000 2009 2014 Q2 2018 Q2 2024 Q2

Some Quick Observations The numbers of laboratory animals required for REACH will dramatically increase animal use in the EU from 2010 until 2024 (especially <2014) Actual animal use will be highly dependent upon the interpretation of test needs by regulators (c.f. SPORT) Tick-box approaches will use many more animals There is a need to focus on endpoints with high projected animal use as priority for Intelligent Testing Strategies

Summary of the Calculator There is no right answer as the results are highly dependent upon input assumptions The Calculator is an easily used tool that can be employed to quantify the impact of REACH in a transparent way The Calculator can provide a rational basis to highlight areas that will most benefit from efforts to reduce overall animal use (c.f. fish acute toxicity <1% versus reproductive toxicity circa 55-71%) The Calculator provides a clear rationale for ITS versus box ticking in terms of cost in animal lives The Calculator can also be used within companies and test consortia to quantify animal use associated with Registration of their chemical portfolios