The identification of adverse health effects has a central role in the development and risk/safety assessment of chemical entities and pharmaceuticals. There is currently a need for better alignment regarding how nonclinical adversity is determined and characterized. The European Society of Toxicologic Pathology (ESTP) therefore coordinated a workshop to review available definitions of adversity, weigh determining and qualifying factors of adversity based on case examples, and recommend a practical approach to define and characterize adversity in toxicology reports, to serve as a valuable prerequisite for future organ-or lesion-specific workshops planned by the ESTP.

During the past 20 years the EU legislation for the notification of chemicals has focussed on new chemicals and at the same time failed to cover the evaluation of existing chemicals in Europe. Therefore, in a new EU chemicals policy (REACH, Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals) the European Commission proposes to evaluate 30,000 chemicals within a period of 15 years. We are providing estimates of the testing requirements based on our personal experiences during the past 20 years. A realistic scenario based on an in-depth discussion of potential toxicological developments and an optimised "tailor-made" testing strategy shows that to meet the goals of the REACH policy, animal numbers may be significantly reduced below 10 million if industry would use in-house data from toxicity testing, which are confidential, if non-animal tests would be used, and if information from quantitative structure activity relationships (QSARs) would be applied in substance-tailored testing schemes. The procedures for evaluating the reproductive toxicity of chemicals have the strongest impact on the total number of animals bred for testing under REACH. We are assuming both an active collaboration with our colleagues in industry and substantial funding of the development and validation of advanced non-animal methods by the EU Commission, specifically in reproductive and developmental toxicity.

Preclinical toxicity studies have demonstrated that exposure of laboratory animals to liver enzyme inducers during preclinical safety assessment results in a signature of toxicological changes characterized by an increase in liver weight, hepatocellular hypertrophy, cell proliferation, and, frequently in long-term (life-time) studies, hepatocarcinogenesis. Recent advances over the last decade have revealed that for many xenobiotics, these changes may be induced through a common mechanism of action involving activation of the nuclear hormone receptors CAR, PXR, or PPARa. The generation of genetically engineered mice that express altered versions of these nuclear hormone receptors, together with other avenues of investigation, have now demonstrated that sensitivity to many of these effects is rodent-specific. These data are consistent with the available epidemiological and empirical human evidence and lend support to the scientific opinion that these changes have little relevance to man. The ESTP therefore convened an international panel of experts to debate the evidence in order to more clearly define for toxicologic pathologists what is considered adverse in the context of hepatocellular hypertrophy. The results of this workshop concluded that hepatomegaly as a consequence of hepatocellular hypertrophy without histologic or clinical pathology alterations indicative of liver toxicity was considered an adaptive and a non-adverse reaction. This conclusion should normally be reached by an integrative weight of evidence approach.

No abstract

No abstract