Potential impact of prioritisation methods on the outcome of cumulative exposure assessments of pesticides

Biesebeek, JD te; Sam, Matthijs; Sprong, R. Corinne; Donkersgoed, Gerda van; Kruisselbrink, JW; Boer, WJ de; Lenthe, Marco van; Voet, Hilko van der; Klaveren, JD van

doi:10.2903/sp.efsa.2021.en-6559

Cited by 14 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…hazard quotient or MOE). This approach allows to identify low‐priority chemicals which can be excluded from further assessment, when their individual risk metric falls below a predefined cut‐off value (Te Biesebeek et al, 2021 )…”

Section: Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Chemicals Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The assessment starts with 100 pesticides for which concentrations and occurrence patterns were available (Van Klaveren et al, 2019 ). For exposure to single pesticides, the concentration in drinking water was set at 0.1 µg (for further details, see Van Klaveren et al, 2019 ; EFSA, 2020a ; Te Biesebeek et al, 2021 ). For 96 of the 100 pesticides, acute reference doses (ARfDs) were extracted from the OpenFoodTox database (Dorne et al, 2017 ) and EU‐Pesticides Database.…”

Section: Appendix D – Risk‐based Approach For Single Chemicals As a Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Pesticides Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The EFSA MIXTOX guidance recommends using the lowest available ARfD of the particular cumulative assessment group (CAG) for imputation of missing ARfDs in a cumulative risk assessment (EFSA Scientific Committee, 2019 ) as a conservative approach. For pesticides without a health‐based guidance values (HBGVs), Te Biesebeek et al ( 2021 ) suggested three approaches: Set additional inclusion criteria based on e.g. occurrence patterns, authorised uses and expected consumption of foods containing the pesticides; Derive a tentative HBGV where possible; Use the lowest HBGV available as a surrogate as suggested by the Scientific Committee (2019) …”

Section: Appendix D – Risk‐based Approach For Single Chemicals As a Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Pesticides Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two prioritisation scenarios were applied for single pesticides: Hazard Quotients calculation at the 95th and 99.9th exposure percentiles, the former as a standard scenario in risk assessment and the later as the required percentile for the human risk assessment of combined exposure to multiple pesticides (see Te Biesebeek et al, 2021 ). HQs for each pesticide were calculated as the individual ratio between the exposure to a single pesticide observed at a particular exposure percentile and the ARfD of the relevant predefined cut‐off values for identifying low‐priority pesticides.…”

Section: Appendix D – Risk‐based Approach For Single Chemicals As a Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Pesticides Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, only the tier 2 approach was used for the refined assessment groups compiled after the prioritisation criteria (HQ(p95) ≤ 0.01, HQ(p95) ≤ 0.1, HQ(p99.9) ≤ 0.01 and HQ(p99.9) ≤ 0.1). The tier 2 cumulative exposure assessment used specific NOAELs for the refined assessment group (CAG‐NAN and CAG‐NAM; see Te Biesebeek et al, 2021 ). MOETs of 100‐fold are interpreted as of low concern as detailed in MIXTOX guidance (EFSA Scientific Committee, 2019 ).…”

Section: Appendix D – Risk‐based Approach For Single Chemicals As a Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Pesticides Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Guidance Document on Scientific criteria for grouping chemicals into assessment groups for human risk assessment of combined exposure to multiple chemicals

More¹,

Bampidis²,

Benford³

et al. 2021

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This guidance document provides harmonised and flexible methodologies to apply scientific criteria and prioritisation methods for grouping chemicals into assessment groups for human risk assessment of combined exposure to multiple chemicals. In the context of EFSA’s risk assessments, the problem formulation step defines the chemicals to be assessed in the terms of reference usually through regulatory criteria often set by risk managers based on legislative requirements. Scientific criteria such as hazard‐driven criteria can be used to group these chemicals into assessment groups. In this guidance document, a framework is proposed to apply hazard‐driven criteria for grouping of chemicals into assessment groups using mechanistic information on toxicity as the gold standard where available (i.e. common mode of action or adverse outcome pathway) through a structured weight of evidence approach. However, when such mechanistic data are not available, grouping may be performed using a common adverse outcome. Toxicokinetic data can also be useful for grouping, particularly when metabolism information is available for a class of compounds and common toxicologically relevant metabolites are shared. In addition, prioritisation methods provide means to identify low‐priority chemicals and reduce the number of chemicals in an assessment group. Prioritisation methods include combined risk‐based approaches, risk‐based approaches for single chemicals and exposure‐driven approaches. Case studies have been provided to illustrate the practical application of hazard‐driven criteria and the use of prioritisation methods for grouping of chemicals in assessment groups. Recommendations for future work are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Chemicals Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix D – Risk‐based Approach For Single Chemicals As a Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Pesticides Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix D – Risk‐based Approach For Single Chemicals As a Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Pesticides Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix D – Risk‐based Approach For Single Chemicals As a Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Pesticides Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendix D – Risk‐based Approach For Single Chemicals As a Prioritisation Methods For Grouping Pesticides Into Assessment Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations