Application of evidence-based methods to construct mechanism-driven chemical assessment frameworks

Application of AOPs to assist regulatory assessment of chemical risks - Case studies, needs and recommendations

While human regulatory risk assessment (RA) still largely relies on animal studies, new approach methodologies (NAMs) based on in vitro, in silico or non-mammalian alternative models are increasingly used to evaluate chemical hazards. Moreover, human epidemiological studies with biomarkers of effect (BoE) also play an invaluable role in identifying health effects associated with chemical exposures. To move towards the next generation risk assessment (NGRA), it is therefore crucial to establish bridges between NAMs and standard approaches, and to establish processes for increasing mechanistically-based biological plausibility in human studies. The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework constitutes an important tool to address these needs but, despite a significant increase in knowledge and awareness, the use of AOPs in chemical RA remains limited. The objective of this paper is to address issues related to using AOPs in a regulatory context from various perspectives as it was discussed in a workshop organized within the European Union partnerships HBM4EU and PARC in spring 2022. The paper presents examples where the AOP framework has been proven useful for the human RA process, particularly in hazard prioritization and characterization, in integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA), and in the identification and validation of BoE in epidemiological studies. Nevertheless, several limitations were identified that hinder the optimal usability and acceptance of AOPs by the regulatory community including the lack of quantitative information on response-response relationships and of efficient ways to map chemical data (exposure and toxicity) onto AOPs. The paper summarizes suggestions, ongoing initiatives and third-party tools that may help to overcome these obstacles and thus assure better implementation of AOPs in the NGRA.

Effect of sleep disturbance on biomarkers related to the development of adverse health outcomes: A systematic review of the human literature

Literature suggests that unrestricted and undisturbed sleep is vital for basic human function and performance; however, it is unclear as to what amount of sleep disturbance leads to dysregulation in biomarkers, which may underscore the development of adverse health effects. This systematic review aims to identify the amount of sleep disturbance that contributes to biomarker changes as a potential precursor to the development of adverse health effects. English-language comparative studies available in PubMed, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases from 1 January 1980 to 31 July 2021 were searched. Where possible, random-effects meta-analyses were used to examine the effect of sleep disturbances on adverse health effects. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Risk of Bias of Nonrandomised Studies - of Exposures instruments and the certainty of the body of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The search identified 92 primary studies reporting on blood pressure, hypertension, heart rate, cardiac arrhythmia, cardiac output, waist circumference, cortisol, adrenaline, noradrenaline, immune system markers, glucose, insulin, cholesterol, and triglyceride levels. Although some meta-analyses suggested there may be an association between sleep disturbances and certain outcomes, the certainty in the evidence was very low due to concerns with risk of bias, inconsistency across exposures, populations, and imprecision in the estimates of effects. Further research is needed to explore the point at which types, levels and duration of sleep disturbances may begin to increase the risk of developing adverse health outcomes to inform and tailor health interventions.

A high-level overview of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Adverse Outcome Pathway Programme

Background The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), through its Chemical Safety Programme, is delegated to ensure the safety of humans and wildlife from harmful toxicants. To support these needs, initiatives to increase the efficiency of hazard identification and risk management are under way. Amongst these, the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) approach integrates information on biological knowledge and test methodologies (both established and new) to support regulatory decision making. AOPs collate biological knowledge from different sources, assess lines of evidence through considerations of causality and undergo rigorous peer-review before being subsequently endorsed by the OECD. It is envisioned that the OECD AOP Development Programme will transform the toxicity testing paradigm by leveraging the strengths of mechanistic and modelling based approaches and enhance the utility of high throughput screening assays. Since its launch, in 2012, the AOP Development Programme has matured with a greater number of AOPs endorsed since inception, and the attraction of new scientific disciplines (e.g. the radiation field). Recently, a Radiation and Chemical (Rad/Chem) AOP Joint Topical Group has been formed by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency High-Level Group on Low-Dose Research (HLG-LDR) under the auspices of the Committee on Radiological Protection and Public Health (CRPPH). The topical group will work to evolve the development and use of the AOP framework in radiation research and regulation. As part of these efforts, the group will bring awareness and understanding on the programme, as it has matured from the chemical perspective. In this context, this paper provides the radiation community with a high-level overview of the OECD AOP Development Programme, including examples of application using knowledge gleaned from the field of chemical toxicology, and their work towards regulatory implementation. Conclusion: Although the drivers for developing AOPs in chemical sector differ from that of the radiation field, the principles and transparency of the approach can benefit both scientific disciplines. By providing perspectives and an understanding of the evolution of the OECD AOP Development Programme including case examples and work towards quantitative AOP development, it may motivate the expansion and implementation of AOPs in the radiation field.