Bhuller Yadvinder , Bishop Patricia , Cope Rhian , Corvaro Marco , Richard A. Currie , Gina M. Hilton , Mehta Jyotigna , Puglisi Raechel , Douglas C. Wolf , Sandrine E. Deglin
{"title":"Transforming the Evaluation of Agrochemicals: A Conceptual Model","authors":"Bhuller Yadvinder , Bishop Patricia , Cope Rhian , Corvaro Marco , Richard A. Currie , Gina M. Hilton , Mehta Jyotigna , Puglisi Raechel , Douglas C. Wolf , Sandrine E. Deglin","doi":"10.1016/j.yrtph.2025.105889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Globally, regulatory authorities face the challenge of integrating advances in science and technology into existing frameworks for agrochemical risk assessment. Addressing this challenge is critical to meeting the demands of food safety and quality for a growing population. To support this shift, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) convened a multi-stakeholder committee of international scientists. Through a problem formulation-led strategy, the committee developed the Transforming the Evaluation of Agrochemicals (TEA) conceptual model to guide the adoption of new methods, best practices, and technologies into regulatory practice for agrochemical safety. The core of the model incorporates the well-established tiered approach routinely used for identifying and characterizing hazards and assessing exposures; however, the model strategically identifies three sequential elements: exposure-led, adaptability, and inclusion of new science. The central core is then surrounded by layers with additional elements, namely: fit-for-purpose over time, adapt to global need, adapt to local need, create incentives, data sharing and transparency, and build trust. Collectively, these ten elements and their intersections result in a novel, TEA conceptual model with elements that have not been simultaneously implemented in any regulatory data package to date. In providing guiding principles, two examples of regulatory applications, and a concise summary of how this model supports an opportunity to go beyond next generation risk assessments focused primarily on alternative approaches to animal testing, we demonstrate the utility of the TEA conceptual model as a tool and mechanism supporting a structured and systematic application towards the intended transformation of agrochemical evaluations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20852,"journal":{"name":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 105889"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230025001199","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Globally, regulatory authorities face the challenge of integrating advances in science and technology into existing frameworks for agrochemical risk assessment. Addressing this challenge is critical to meeting the demands of food safety and quality for a growing population. To support this shift, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) convened a multi-stakeholder committee of international scientists. Through a problem formulation-led strategy, the committee developed the Transforming the Evaluation of Agrochemicals (TEA) conceptual model to guide the adoption of new methods, best practices, and technologies into regulatory practice for agrochemical safety. The core of the model incorporates the well-established tiered approach routinely used for identifying and characterizing hazards and assessing exposures; however, the model strategically identifies three sequential elements: exposure-led, adaptability, and inclusion of new science. The central core is then surrounded by layers with additional elements, namely: fit-for-purpose over time, adapt to global need, adapt to local need, create incentives, data sharing and transparency, and build trust. Collectively, these ten elements and their intersections result in a novel, TEA conceptual model with elements that have not been simultaneously implemented in any regulatory data package to date. In providing guiding principles, two examples of regulatory applications, and a concise summary of how this model supports an opportunity to go beyond next generation risk assessments focused primarily on alternative approaches to animal testing, we demonstrate the utility of the TEA conceptual model as a tool and mechanism supporting a structured and systematic application towards the intended transformation of agrochemical evaluations.
期刊介绍:
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology publishes peer reviewed articles that involve the generation, evaluation, and interpretation of experimental animal and human data that are of direct importance and relevance for regulatory authorities with respect to toxicological and pharmacological regulations in society. All peer-reviewed articles that are published should be devoted to improve the protection of human health and environment. Reviews and discussions are welcomed that address legal and/or regulatory decisions with respect to risk assessment and management of toxicological and pharmacological compounds on a scientific basis. It addresses an international readership of scientists, risk assessors and managers, and other professionals active in the field of human and environmental health.
Types of peer-reviewed articles published:
-Original research articles of relevance for regulatory aspects covering aspects including, but not limited to:
1.Factors influencing human sensitivity
2.Exposure science related to risk assessment
3.Alternative toxicological test methods
4.Frameworks for evaluation and integration of data in regulatory evaluations
5.Harmonization across regulatory agencies
6.Read-across methods and evaluations
-Contemporary Reviews on policy related Research issues
-Letters to the Editor
-Guest Editorials (by Invitation)