A Weight-of-evidence (WoE) evaluation should be applied in assessing all the available data for the identification of endocrine disrupting (ED) properties of chemicals. The European Commission draft acts specifying criteria under the biocidal products and plant protection products regulations require that WoE is implemented for the assessment of such products. However, only some general considerations and principles of how a WoE should be conducted are provided. This paper reviews WoE approaches to distil key recommendations specifically for the evaluation of potential ED properties of chemicals. In a manner, which is consistent with existing, published WoE frameworks, the WoE evaluation of ED properties can be divided into four phases: 1) Definition of causal questions and data gathering and selection, 2) Review of individual studies, 3) Data integration and evaluation, and 4) Drawing conclusions based on inferences. Recommendations are made on how to conduct each phase robustly and transparently to help guide the WoE evaluation of potential endocrine disrupting properties of chemicals within a European regulatory context.
The ongoing debate concerning the regulation of endocrine disruptors, has increasingly led to questions concerning the current testing of chemicals and whether this is adequate for the assessment of potential endocrine disrupting effects. This paper describes the current testing approaches for plant protection product (PPP) active substances in the European Union and the United States and how they relate to the assessment of endocrine disrupting properties for human and environmental health. This includes a discussion of whether the current testing approaches cover modalities other than the estrogen, androgen, thyroid and steroidogenesis (EATS) pathways, sensitive windows of exposure, adequate assessment of human endocrine disorders and wildlife species, and the determination of thresholds for endocrine disruption. It is concluded, that the scope and nature of the core and triggered data requirements for PPP active substances are scientifically robust to address adverse effects mediated through endocrine mode(s) of action and to characterise these effects in terms of dose response.
Endocrine screening assays not only provide mechanistic information on the potential of a substance to interact with the endocrine system, but also data potentially relevant for risk assessment. However, these screening assays have a number of limitations that should be considered before the direct use of such data for risk assessment purposes. This paper discusses the limitations that should be considered for both human and environmental risk assessment. A proposal is made to provide an objective and transparent process in order to consider which endpoint(s) might be incorporated into a risk assessment, and when more definitive studies may be of value. The proposal is complemented with an easy-to-follow flowchart to aid industry scientists and regulators when evaluating the relevance of these data. Such an approach is necessary to ensure the appropriate use of screening data to further our understanding of the eco/toxicological profile of substances undergoing screening.
The phenylketone HPPA reacts with ketone test fields of 3 commercially available urine dipsticks, producing a red–brown color change that may be misinterpreted as positive for ketones by reflectance photometry.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.