Use and limitations of clinical data in the identification and classification of low molecular weight chemicals (LMWCs) as respiratory sensitizers: recommendations for improvement.

While progress has been made in recent years, there are still no suitable and accepted , or models that can be used to accurately predict whether a chemical substance has the intrinsic property to cause immune-mediated chemical respiratory allergy, typically manifested as allergic asthma or allergic rhinitis which represents a severe health hazard. Regulatory authorities have relied primarily on clinical evidence (case reports, clinical databases, worker exposure studies) to classify substances as respiratory sensitizers, but this evidence can lack a proven immunological mechanism which is necessary to identify substances which can cause life-long sensitization and clinically relevant allergic symptoms in the respiratory tract in an exposed population (such respiratory allergens may be considered as "true" sensitizers, in analogy to the definition of skin sensitization, and in contrast to respiratory irritants). In light of this, the European Center for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals convened a Task Force to evaluate the types of clinical methods and data sources and the implications of relying on such data for regulatory decision making from a scientific perspective.

Food for thought - Paving the way for a UK roadmap towards optimum consumer safety: Development, Endorsement and Regulatory acceptance of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in Chemical Risk Assessment and Beyond.

Advances in biosciences, chemistry, technology, and computer sciences have resulted in the unparalleled development of candidate New Approach Methodologies over the last few years. Many of these are potentially invaluable in the safety assessment of chemicals, but very few have been adopted for regulatory decision making. There is an immediate opportunity to use NAMs in safety assessment where the vision is to be able to predict risk more rapidly, accurately, and efficiently to further assure consumer safety.

A UK framework for the assessment and integration of different scientific evidence streams in chemical risk assessment.

Background: Few methods are available for transparently combining different evidence streams for chemical risk assessment to reach an integrated conclusion on the probability of causation. Hence, the UK Committees on Toxicity (COT) and on Carcinogenicity (COC) have reviewed current practice and developed guidance on how to achieve this in a transparent manner, using graphical visualisation.

Methods/approach: All lines of evidence, including toxicological, epidemiological, new approach methodologies, and mode of action should be considered, taking account of their strengths/weaknesses in their relative weighting towards a conclusion on the probability of causation.

The chemical landscape: the future of risk assessment toward optimum consumer safety.

The further optimization of consumer safety through risk assessment of chemicals present in food will require adaptability and flexibility to utilize the accelerating developments in safety science and technology. New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) are gaining traction as a systematic approach to support informed decision making in chemical risk assessment. The vision is to be able to predict risk more accurately, rapidly and efficiently.

Considerations for the development of guidance on dose level selection for developmental and reproductive toxicity studies.

In 2022, the European Chemicals Agency issued advice on the selection of high dose levels for developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART) studies indicating that the highest dose tested should aim to induce clear evidence of reproductive toxicity without excessive toxicity and severe suffering in parental animals. In addition, a recent publication advocated that a 10% decrease in body weight gain should be replaced with a 10% decrease in bodyweight as a criterion for dose adequacy. Experts from the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals evaluated these recent developments and their potential impact on study outcomes and interpretation and identified that the advice was not aligned with OECD test guidelines or with humane endpoints guidance.