| 1. |
- Schug, Thaddeus T., et al.
(författare)
-
Designing Endocrine Disruption Out of the Next Generation of Chemicals
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Green Chemistry. - : Royal Society of Chemistry. - 1463-9262 .- 1463-9270. ; 15:1, s. 181-198
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A central goal of green chemistry is to avoid hazard in the design of new chemicals. This objective is best achieved when information about a chemical's potential hazardous effects is obtained as early in the design process as feasible. Endocrine disruption is a type of hazard that to date has been inadequately addressed by both industrial and regulatory science. To aid chemists in avoiding this hazard, we propose an endocrine disruption testing protocol for use by chemists in the design of new chemicals. The Tiered Protocol for Endocrine Disruption (TiPED) has been created under the oversight of a scientific advisory committee composed of leading representatives from both green chemistry and the environmental health sciences. TiPED is conceived as a tool for new chemical design, thus it starts with a chemist theoretically at "the drawing board." It consists of five testing tiers ranging from broad in silico evaluation up through specific cell- and whole organism-based assays. To be effective at detecting endocrine disruption, a testing protocol must be able to measure potential hormone-like or hormone-inhibiting effects of chemicals, as well as the many possible interactions and signaling sequellae such chemicals may have with cell-based receptors. Accordingly, we have designed this protocol to broadly interrogate the endocrine system. The proposed protocol will not detect all possible mechanisms of endocrine disruption, because scientific understanding of these phenomena is advancing rapidly. To ensure that the protocol remains current, we have established a plan for incorporating new assays into the protocol as the science advances. In this paper we present the principles that should guide the science of testing new chemicals for endocrine disruption, as well as principles by which to evaluate individual assays for applicability, and laboratories for reliability. In a 'proof-of-principle' test, we ran 6 endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that act via different endocrinological mechanisms through the protocol using published literature. Each was identified as endocrine active by one or more tiers. We believe that this voluntary testing protocol will be a dynamic tool to facilitate efficient and early identification of potentially problematic chemicals, while ultimately reducing the risks to public health.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bennett, Deborah, et al.
(författare)
-
Project TENDR : Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risks. The TENDR Consensus Statement
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Health Perspectives. - : National Institute of Environmental Health Science. - 0091-6765 .- 1552-9924. ; 124:7, s. A118-A122
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Children in America today are at an unacceptably high risk of developing neurodevelopmental disorders that affect the brain and nervous system including autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, intellectual disabilities, and other learning and behavioral disabilities. These are complex disorders with multiple causes-genetic, social, and environmental. The contribution of toxic chemicals to these disorders can be prevented. Approach: Leading scientific and medical experts, along with children's health advocates, came together in 2015 under the auspices of Project TENDR: Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risks to issue a call to action to reduce widespread exposures to chemicals that interfere with fetal and children's brain development. Based on the available scientific evidence, the TENDR authors have identified prime examples of toxic chemicals and pollutants that increase children's risks for neurodevelopmental disorders. These include chemicals that are used extensively in consumer products and that have become widespread in the environment. Some are chemicals to which children and pregnant women are regularly exposed, and they are detected in the bodies of virtually all Americans in national surveys conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The vast majority of chemicals in industrial and consumer products undergo almost no testing for developmental neurotoxicity or other health effects. Conclusion: Based on these findings, we assert that the current system in the United States for evaluating scientific evidence and making health-based decisions about environmental chemicals is fundamentally broken. To help reduce the unacceptably high prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders in our children, we must eliminate or significantly reduce exposures to chemicals that contribute to these conditions. We must adopt a new framework for assessing chemicals that have the potential to disrupt brain development and prevent the use of those that may pose a risk. This consensus statement lays the foundation for developing recommendations to monitor, assess, and reduce exposures to neurotoxic chemicals. These measures are urgently needed if we are to protect healthy brain development so that current and future generations can reach their fullest potential.
|
|
| 3. |
- La Merrill, Michele A, et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus on the key characteristics of endocrine-disrupting chemicals as a basis for hazard identification
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Nature Reviews Endocrinology. - : Nature Publishing Group. - 1759-5029 .- 1759-5037. ; 16:1, s. 45-57
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are exogenous chemicals that interfere with hormone action, thereby increasing the risk of adverse health outcomes, including cancer, reproductive impairment, cognitive deficits and obesity. A complex literature of mechanistic studies provides evidence on the hazards of EDC exposure, yet there is no widely accepted systematic method to integrate these data to help identify EDC hazards. Inspired by work to improve hazard identification of carcinogens using key characteristics (KCs), we have developed ten KCs of EDCs based on our knowledge of hormone actions and EDC effects. In this Expert Consensus Statement, we describe the logic by which these KCs are identified and the assays that could be used to assess several of these KCs. We reflect on how these ten KCs can be used to identify, organize and utilize mechanistic data when evaluating chemicals as EDCs, and we use diethylstilbestrol, bisphenol A and perchlorate as examples to illustrate this approach.
|
|
| 4. |
- Vandenberg, Laura N, et al.
(författare)
-
The Use and Misuse of Historical Controls in Regulatory Toxicology : Lessons from the CLARITY-BPA Study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Endocrinology. - : Oxford University Press. - 0013-7227 .- 1945-7170. ; 161:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- For many endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) including Bisphenol A (BPA), animal studies show that environmentally relevant exposures cause harm; human studies are consistent with these findings. Yet, regulatory agencies charged with protecting public health continue to conclude that human exposures to these EDCs pose no risk. One reason for the disconnect between the scientific consensus on EDCs in the endocrinology community and the failure to act in the regulatory community is the dependence of the latter on so-called "guideline studies" to evaluate hazards, and the inability to incorporate independent scientific studies in risk assessment. The Consortium Linking Academic and Regulatory Insights on Toxicity (CLARITY) study was intended to bridge this gap, combining a "guideline" study with independent hypothesis-driven studies designed to be more appropriate to evaluate EDCs. Here we examined an aspect of "guideline" studies, the use of so-called "historical controls," which are essentially control data borrowed from prior studies to aid in the interpretation of current findings. The US Food and Drug Administration authors used historical controls to question the plausibility of statistically significant BPA-related effects in the CLARITY study. We examined the use of historical controls on 5 outcomes in the CLARITY "guideline" study: mammary neoplasms, pituitary neoplasms, kidney nephropathy, prostate inflammation and adenomas, and body weight. Using US Food and Drug Administration-proposed historical control data, our evaluation revealed that endpoints used in "guideline" studies are not as reproducible as previously held. Combined with other data comparing the effects of ethinyl estradiol in 2 "guideline" studies including CLARITY-BPA, we conclude that near-exclusive reliance on "guideline" studies can result in scientifically invalid conclusions.
|
|
