Evaluation of the Use of QSARS for Priority Setting and Risk Assessment

Abstract Impending changes in EEC legislation have accelerated the need to define the principles and practical considerations of the use of QSARs in priority setting and risk assessment. It is important to delineate the limitations of this approach and to review whether and how this information should be used in the risk assessment. The value and limitations of QSARs for use in priority setting and risk assessment will not be discussed in detail since the European Chemical Industry Ecology and Toxicology Centre (ECETOC) has only recently established a Task Force to tackle this issue. The terms of reference of the Task Force are: (1) compare the predictions obtained with QSARs to measured data using ECETOC databases and other sources of data and comment on the validity and applicability of such QSARs; (2) identify and review software packages which are available for accessing and using appropriate QSARs; (3) identify those aspects of environmental distribution, fate and effects where the further development of QSARs is desirable and feasible; and (4) provide a scientific basis for ECETOC's contribution to the activities of the European Chemicals Bureau (ECB) in this area. In this short paper, only an initial and personal evaluation is made of when and where to use QSARs in the priority setting and risk assessment process within the regulatory framework. Some critical remarks and suggestions are provided to guide future developments and integration of QSARs in the risk assessment process.     

Assessment of QSARS for Predicting Fate and Effects of Chemicals in the Environment: An International European Project

Abstract In 1993, an international project on QSAR has been started with funding from the Commission of the European Union. The first part of the project is focused on preparing an overview of existing models for the prediction of environmental parameters such as bioconcentration, sorption, degradation and ecotoxicity. Emphasis will be given to defining the limitations of the models. Since all models, including QSARs, have their limitations, it is important that these limitations are known in case QSARs are actually used and applied within the risk assessment context. The second part of the project is directed towards experimental research on new developments with emphasis on the use of multivariate techniques and quantum chemical properties. In this short paper, a general outline of the project will be given, as well as some first results. Results of experimental work within this project will be published in the proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on QSAR in Environmental Sciences and will appear in this same journal.     

Committee on Natural Toxins and Food Allergens. Marine and freshwater toxins

There have been major developments this past year in the Marine and Freshwater Toxins topic area (formerly Phycotoxins). These include AOAC approval and inauguration of a new AOAC Presidential Task Force on Marine and Freshwater Toxins to accelerate methods validation, and the appointment of several new Topic Advisors. A joint FAO/IOC/WHO group addressing biotoxins in molluscan bivalves is also relevant to this report and to the new Task Force. The AOAC Presidential Task Force on Marine and Freshwater Toxins is an international group that, in late November 2004, consisted of 90 world experts and stakeholders. Chaired by this General Referee, the group establishes methods priorities based on analytical methods criteria, determines fitness for purpose, identifies and reviews available methodologies, recommends methodologies for validation, and identifies complementary analytical tools. Once appropriate analytical methodology has been identified or developed, the Task Force is able to identify financial and technical resources necessary to validate the methods. The first two formal meetings of the Task Force were held in Bethesda, MD, on May 19, 2004 and in St. Louis, MO, on September 22, 2004. These meetings were held in conjunction with the XI International IUPAC Symposium on Mycotoxins and Phycotoxins and the 118th AOAC INTERNATIONAL Annual Meeting and Exposition, respectively. The Bethesda meeting served to introduce members of the group to the AOAC Community/Task Force model and to discuss objectives, concerns, general workings, and communications. The meeting concluded on an encouraging note, with a commitment from AOAC to help provide financial resources for the review of nonproprietary methods deemed high priority by the Task Force. This development was seen as an important step toward reaching methods validation objectives. The terms of reference for the Task Force were approved by the AOAC Board of Directors in late June, 2004. They described the Task Force membership as composed of voting and nonvoting members, with the voting members consisting of 13 members (12 plus the Chair). Voting members comprise of a balance of government regulators, academics, and industry members. No single agency has more than 2 voting members. Task Force members serve as experts in the field and agree to identify other experts; recommend individuals who can serve on the Task Force and as Chair; develop and prioritize a list of marine and freshwater toxins that need validated methods; assist in identifying existing methods for validation through AOAC validation programs; and recommend to the AOAC INTERNATIONAL Board of Directors policies and procedures necessary to accomplish the mission of the Task Force. They endeavor to actively support the work of the Task Force through garnering of sources of funding (except where prohibited by employer); identifying potential participating laboratories, sample identification and acquisition; and increasing program awareness among stakeholders. They assist AOAC in the identification of study directors and in the development of quality measurement tools by participating in the validation of methods and by identifying venues for members of the Task Group or the community to gather and assist with meeting content. Prior to the September 2004, AOAC Annual Meeting, the Task Force approved a set of Analytical Methods Selection Criteria, which are critical to the mission of the Task Force. They can be found, along with the Terms of Reference, roster of members, and other information, on the Task Force Web site at http://www.aoac.org/marine toxins/task_force.htm. The September 22, 2004 Task Force meeting in St. Louis included discussion of 2 interlaboratory studies, a proprietary kit for domoic acid by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; Biosense Labs AS, Bergen, Norway) and also a nonproprietary liquid chromatography (LC) method for paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) toxins by precolumn oxidation (James F. Lawrence, Health Canada). These 2 methods were recommended by the Task Force for review by AOAC in September 2004. The group also discussed future priority directions, aspects of interlaboratory studies and official methods of analysis, other methods validation issues, future meetings, and funding. In addition to the Task Force meeting, 2 subgroup meetings were held. One subgroup addressed strategies to replace the mouse bioassay for brevetoxins with alternative modern methods based on ELISA or LC/mass spectrometry (MS). Brevetoxin metabolites, toxicity issues, and extraction conditions as well as future field studies were addressed in detail. The receptor binding assay (RBA)/saxitoxins subgroup addressed several aspects of the methodology, radiolabeled saxitoxin, and comparisons of mouse bioassay and RBA response. Both subgroups were productive and were seen as very useful by the participants. Task Force attendees generally agreed that subgroups are the most effective means of progressing towards validation of new methods and of ensuring thorough discussions of methods under consideration. By the time of their next meeting (April 2005) at the "Marine and Freshwater Toxins Analysis: 1st Joint Symposium and AOAC Task Force Meeting" in Baiona, Spain, the Task Force will have several well developed new subgroups in the areas of okadaic acid and dinophysis toxins, yessotoxins, domoic acids, and ciguatoxins. Some of the subgroups will hold face-to-face meetings in Spain and others will meet at future symposia or joint meetings. It is likely that training sessions will be associated with multiple Task Force meetings planned for 2005. Details on these meetings can be found on the Task Force Web site. Although the Task Force has experienced rapid growth, the addition of new members to the group, especially industry and government stakeholders, is encouraged. Task Force member Michael Quilliam, NRC Canada, provided the information given below on a joint CODEX group of special relevance to the new Task Force. This group met in late September 2004. For more information, see http://www.who.int/foodsafety/chem/meetings/biotoxin/en/.     

Regulatory use of (Q)SARs in toxicological hazard assessment strategies

In 2001, the European Commission published a policy statement ("White Paper") on future chemicals regulation and risk reduction that proposed the use of non-animal test systems and tailor-made testing approaches, including (Q)SARs, to reduce financial costs and the number of test animals employed. The authors have compiled a database containing data submitted within the EU chemicals notification procedure. From these data, (Q)SARs for the prediction of local irritation/corrosion and/or sensitisation potential were developed and published. These (Q)SARs, together with an expert system supporting their use, will be submitted for official validation and application within regulatory hazard assessment strategies. The main features are: ? two sets of structural alerts for the prediction of skin sensitisation hazard classification as defined by the European risk phrase R43, comprising 15 rules for chemical substructures deemed to be sensitising by direct action with cells or proteins, and three rules for substructures acting indirectly, i.e., requiring biochemical transformation; ? a decision support system (DSS) for the prediction of skin and/or eye lesion potential built from information extracted from our database. This DSS combines SARs defining reactive chemical substructures relevant for local lesions to be classified, and QSARs for the prediction of the absence of such a potential. The role of the BfR database, and (Q)SARs derived from it, in the use of current and future (EU) testing strategies for irritation and sensitisation is discussed.     

Global Government applications of analogues,SAR s and QSAR s to predict aquatic toxicity,chemical or physical properties,environmental fate parameters and health effects of organic chemicals

Faced with the need to predict physical and chemical properties, environmental fate, ecological effects and health effects of organic chemicals in the absence of experimental data, several Government organizations have been applying analogues, Structure Activity Relationships (SARs) and Quantitative Structure Activity Relationships (QSARs) to develop those predictions. To establish some benchmarks for monitoring future increases in applications of analogues, SARs and QSARs by global Government organizations, this paper describes the current applications of analogues, SARs and QSARs by Australian, Canadian, Danish, European, German, Japanese, Netherlands, and United States Government organizations to predict physical and chemical properties, environmental fate, ecological effects and health effects of organic chemicals.     

Development and use of reference materials in India – status and plans

Reference materials development activities in India started during the period 1955–1960 for quality control in the production and use of drugs and pharmaceuticals. While the practice of import and distribution gradually accelerated in some areas, including medical, environment etc., the earliest known development of Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) within the country began with the preparation of metallurgical CRMs somewhere around 1965. A few more area-specific programs involving preparation of CRMs for quality control in the electronic industries, food and food products etc., began in the past decade. A common national program covering these activities was initiated in 1996, through organization of a national workshop on the subject and formation of a National Task Force for the development and use of reference materials in the country. The existing status and the priority needs of reference materials have been compiled by the Task Force, and a program has also been prepared for development of some of the urgently required CRMs within the country.

     

Uses and limitations of quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs) to categorize substances on the Canadian domestic substance list as persistent and/or bioaccumulative,and inherently toxic to non-human organisms

Under sections 73 and 74 of the revised Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA 1999) , Environment Canada and Health Canada must "categorize" and "screen" about 23,000 substances on the Domestic Substances List (DSL) for persistence (P), bioaccumulation (B), and inherently toxic (iT) properties. Since experimental data for P, B and iT are only available for a few DSL substances, a workshop was held to address issues associated with the use of Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships (QSARs) to categorize these substances. This paper describes the results of an 11-12 November 1999 International Workshop sponsored by Environment Canada to discuss potential uses and limitations of QSARs to categorize DSL substances as either persistent or bioaccumulative and iT to non-human organisms and to recommend future research needed to develop methods for predicting the P, B and iT of difficult-to-model substances.     

QSARs for identifying and prioritizing substances with persistence and bioconcentration potential

From the 8511 chemicals with 1998 production volumes reported to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), the TSCA Interagency Testing Committee's (ITC's) Degradation Effects Bioconcentration Information Testing Strategies (DEBITS) was used to identify 56 chemicals. The DEBITS Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships (QSARs) and the U.S. EPA's PBT profiler QSARs were used to predict the persistence and bioconcentration factors of these 56 chemicals. Partial order ranking was used to prioritise the chemicals based on persistence and bioconcentration potential.     

Regulatory use of (Q)SARs in toxicological hazard assessment strategies

In 2001, the European Commission published a policy statement ("White Paper") on future chemicals regulation and risk reduction that proposed the use of non-animal test systems and tailor-made testing approaches, including (Q)SARs, to reduce financial costs and the number of test animals employed. The authors have compiled a database containing data submitted within the EU chemicals notification procedure. From these data, (Q)SARs for the prediction of local irritation/corrosion and/or sensitisation potential were developed and published. These (Q)SARs, together with an expert system supporting their use, will be submitted for official validation and application within regulatory hazard assessment strategies. The main features are: two sets of structural alerts for the prediction of skin sensitisation hazard classification as defined by the European risk phrase R43, comprising 15 rules for chemical substructures deemed to be sensitising by direct action with cells or proteins, and three rules for substructures acting indirectly, i.e., requiring biochemical transformation; a decision support system (DSS) for the prediction of skin and/or eye lesion potential built from information extracted from our database. This DSS combines SARs defining reactive chemical substructures relevant for local lesions to be classified, and QSARs for the prediction of the absence of such a potential. The role of the BfR database, and (Q)SARs derived from it, in the use of current and future (EU) testing strategies for irritation and sensitisation is discussed.     

Marine and freshwater toxins

In a very busy and exciting year, 2005 included First Action approval of a much needed official method for paralytic shellfish toxins and multiple international toxin symposia highlighted by groundbreaking research. These are the first-year milestones and activities of the Marine and Freshwater Toxins Task Force and Analytical Community. Inaugurated in 2004 and described in detail in last year's General Referee Report (1) this international toxins group has grown to 150 members from many regions and countries. Perhaps most important they are now making important and global contributions to food safety and to providing alternatives to animal-based assays. Official Method 2005.06 was first approved in late 2004 by the Task Force and subsequently Official First Action in 2005 (2) by the Methods Committee on Natural Toxins and Food Allergens and the Official Methods Board. This nonproprietary method (3) is a precolumn oxidation, liquid chromatographic method that makes good use of fluorescence detection to provide high sensitivity detection of the saxitoxins. It has also proven to be rugged enough for regulatory use and the highest level of validation. As pointed out in the report of method principle investigator and Study Director James Lawrence, approval of 2005.06 now provides the first official alternative to the mouse bioassay after many decades of shellfish monitoring. This past year in April 2005 the group also held their first international conference, "Marine and Freshwater Toxins Analysis: Ist Joint Symposium and AOAC Task Force Meeting," in Baiona, Spain. The 4-day conference consisted of research and stakeholder presentations and symposium-integrated subgroup sessions on ciguatoxins, saxitoxin assays and liquid chromatography (LC) methods for saxitoxins and domoic acids, okadaiates and azaspiracids, and yessotoxins. Many of these subgroups were recently formed in 2005 and are working towards their goals of producing officially validated analytical methods. (Abstracts from the Baiona 2005 meeting cited in this report can be found in the online version of the conference abstract book in the Files and Folders section of the Marine and Freshwater Toxins online community at www.aoac.org.) An active topic for discussion in Baiona and subsequent Task Force activities was the expert consultation for Codex which met in Oslo, Norway in 2004 (previously described and cited in last year's GR report, ref 1). The consultation group's executive summary report (http://www.fao.org/es/ESN/food/risk_biotoxin en.stm) describes suggested changes in action levels as well as methods, method validation, and other issues. September 2005 saw the AOAC Task Force efforts further supported by another symposium, "Marine and Freshwater Toxins: Quality Methods for Food Safety and International Trade," at the AOAC INTERNATIONAL Annual Conference in Orlando, Florida. The multidisciplinary talks at this full day symposium ranged from ciguatoxins to cyanobacterial toxins, and spanned toxicology, biochemistry, molecular biology and analytical chemistry. Again, the symposium preceded Task Force meetings. Toxin subgroups, including a new group on cyanobacterial toxins, met for engaging and productive subgroup discussions. All of these activities were preceded by a Wiley Award symposium for Task Force member Mike Quilliam of NRC Canada. These talks, presented at a half-day symposium on the first day of the Annual Meeting, focused on Quilliam's work with LC tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) and certified reference standards and materials, and included related presentations by some of his many research collaborators. To maintain flow and continuity between symposia and between Task Force meetings, the group now uses new electronic discussion forums. Individual subgroup areas, under the Marine and Freshwater Toxins Task Force, comprise this online community. First introduced by AOAC INTERNATIONAL in early 2005, these new resources are being used to distribute information and to supplement the in-person subgroup meetings and electronic mail in the group's validation efforts.     

New Developments in Environmental Exposure Assessment in the EU Pesticide Regulatory Process

The paper discusses key aspects of the European Union (EU) regulatory policy for environmental exposure assessment of agricultural pesticide active substances (a.s.) in soil and water, which is examined in the context of the EU Authorisations Directive (91/414/EEC). For agricultural pesticide regulation within EU Member States (MS), the Authorisations Directive will gradually replace existing national systems. Discussion is concentrated on this directive, looking in particular at the Uniform Principles therein and the possible ways that these decision-making guidelines are being developed into a workable regulatory framework. The aim in this process of negotiated development involving the Member States, the Agrochemical Industry and the European Commission (EC), is to identify any questions or data requirements that will be needed for agricultural pesticides.     

Method development in relation to regulatory requirements for detection of GMOs in the food chain

This is a summary report of a joint workshop held in Brussels, Belgium, in December 2000. The workshop was organized by the ILSI Europe Novel Food Task Force in collaboration with the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) and ILSI International Food Biotechnology Committee. The purpose was to investigate progress in the development of analytical methods since the last workshop was held in June 1998.     

The prospects for using (Q)SARs in a changing political environment--high expectations and a key role for the European Commission's joint research centre

Recent policy developments in the European union (EU) and within the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have placed increased emphasis on the use of structure-activity relationships (SARs) and quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs), collectively referred to as (Q)SARs, within various regulatory programmes for the assessment of chemicals and products. The most significant example within the EU is the European commission's proposal (of 29 October 2003) to introduce a new system for managing chemicals (called REACH), which calls for an increased use of (Q)SARs and other non-animal methods, especially for the assessment of low production volume chemicals. Another development within the EU is the Seventh Amendment to the Cosmetics Directive, which foresees the phasing out of animal testing on cosmetics, combined with the imposition of marketing bans on cosmetics that have been tested on animals after certain deadlines. At the same time, the Existing Chemicals programme within the OECD is investigating ways of increasing the use of chemical category approaches, which depend heavily on the use of (Q)SARs, activity-activity relationships and read-across. Such developments are placing an enormous challenge on industry, regulatory bodies, and on the European commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC), which is responsible for providing independent scientific advice to policy makers in the European Commission and the Member States. This paper reviews the different scientific and regulatory purposes for which reliable (Q)SARs could be used, and describes the current work of the JRC in providing scientific support for the development, validation and implementation of (Q)SARs.     

The role of the European centre for the validation of alternative methods (ECVAM) in the validation of (Q)SARs

Under the current chemicals legislation, the regulatory use of structure-activity relationships (SARs) and quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs), collectively referred to as (Q)SARs, for the assessment of chemicals is limited, partly due to concerns about the extent to which (Q)SAR estimates can be relied upon. On 29 October 2003, the European Commission adopted a legislative proposal that foresees the introduction of a new regulatory system for chemicals called REACH (Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemicals), which will impose equivalent information requirements on both new and existing chemicals. For reasons of practicality, cost-effectiveness and animal welfare, it is envisaged that (Q)SARs will play an important role in the assessment of some 30,000 existing chemicals for which further information may be required under the REACH system. It will therefore be essential that the (Q)SAR models used will produce reliable estimates. To overcome the barriers in the acceptance of (Q)SARs for regulatory purposes, it is widely acknowledged that there needs to be international agreement on the principles of (Q)SAR validation, and that the process of (Q)SAR validation should be managed by independent organisations, with a view to providing independent advice to the regulators who make decisions on the acceptability of (Q)SARs. The European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), which is part of the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC), has a well-established role in providing independent scientific and technical advice to European policy makers. This paper describes progress made at an international level regarding the principles of validation, and explains the role of ECVAM regarding the practical validation of (Q)SARs.     

A perspective on environmental models and QSARs

A general review is presented of the roles of QSARs and mass balance models as tools for assessing the environmental fate and effects of chemicals of commerce. It is argued that all such chemicals must be assessed using a consistent and transparent methodology that uses chemical property data derived from QSARs, or experimental determinations when possible and applies evaluative or region-specific environmental models. These data and models enable an assessment to be made of the key chemical features of persistence, bioaccumulation, potential for long-range transport and toxicity. The other key feature is quantity used or discharged to the environment. A taxonomy of environmental models is presented in which it is suggested that rather than develop a single comprehensive model, the aim should be to establish a set of coordinated and consistent models treating evaluative and real environmental systems at a variety of scales from local to global and including food web models, organism-specific models and human exposure and pharmacokinetic models. The concentrations derived from these models can then be compared with levels judged to be of toxic significance. A brief account is given of perceived QSAR needs in terms of partitioning, reactivity, transport and toxicity data to support these models.