Prioritisation of co-formulants and plant protection products for non-dietary risk assessment using NAMs

IF 6.9 2区 医学 Q1 TOXICOLOGY
Alkiviadis Stagkos-Georgiadis, Bright Baffour-Duah, Tewes Tralau, Denise Bloch
{"title":"Prioritisation of co-formulants and plant protection products for non-dietary risk assessment using NAMs","authors":"Alkiviadis Stagkos-Georgiadis,&nbsp;Bright Baffour-Duah,&nbsp;Tewes Tralau,&nbsp;Denise Bloch","doi":"10.1007/s00204-025-04078-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Plant protection products (PPPs) contain one or more active substances (AS) as well as a varying number of co-formulants. Whilst AS are amongst the most data-rich and well-investigated substances in toxicology, possibly toxic co-formulants and PPPs with potentially relevant mixture effects are not considered in risk assessment. This especially applies to operators who come in contact with the undiluted product. In this study, we investigated this concern by prioritising co-formulants and PPPs for further testing using new approach methodologies (NAMs). We combined in silico predictions of co-formulant nephrotoxicity and hepatotoxicity with AS and co-formulant kinetic interaction prediction and thus identified 427 PPPs for further investigation. In a next step, six PPPs were there assessed for their comparative AS and PPP toxicity in liver cells. One product displayed more than additive effects and was thus tested for in silico predicted kinetic interactions. Whilst permeability glycoprotein (P-gp) interaction could not be confirmed, the observed effect may likely be attributed to CYP2C19 interaction. In summary, the findings highlight that the use of in silico tools as a screening step is useful to limit the number of PPPs for further testing. Subsequent in vitro testing of a limited number of PPPs supported the application of the additivity concept and highlighted that prioritised co-formulants contribute additively. We propose the integration of such co-formulants into the Hazard Index (HI) approach currently applied in active substance combined risk assessment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8329,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Toxicology","volume":"99 8","pages":"3205 - 3221"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00204-025-04078-0.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00204-025-04078-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Plant protection products (PPPs) contain one or more active substances (AS) as well as a varying number of co-formulants. Whilst AS are amongst the most data-rich and well-investigated substances in toxicology, possibly toxic co-formulants and PPPs with potentially relevant mixture effects are not considered in risk assessment. This especially applies to operators who come in contact with the undiluted product. In this study, we investigated this concern by prioritising co-formulants and PPPs for further testing using new approach methodologies (NAMs). We combined in silico predictions of co-formulant nephrotoxicity and hepatotoxicity with AS and co-formulant kinetic interaction prediction and thus identified 427 PPPs for further investigation. In a next step, six PPPs were there assessed for their comparative AS and PPP toxicity in liver cells. One product displayed more than additive effects and was thus tested for in silico predicted kinetic interactions. Whilst permeability glycoprotein (P-gp) interaction could not be confirmed, the observed effect may likely be attributed to CYP2C19 interaction. In summary, the findings highlight that the use of in silico tools as a screening step is useful to limit the number of PPPs for further testing. Subsequent in vitro testing of a limited number of PPPs supported the application of the additivity concept and highlighted that prioritised co-formulants contribute additively. We propose the integration of such co-formulants into the Hazard Index (HI) approach currently applied in active substance combined risk assessment.

在使用NAMs进行非膳食风险评估时,确定共制剂和植物保护产品的优先次序。
植物保护产品(PPPs)含有一种或多种活性物质(AS)以及不同数量的共制剂。虽然AS是毒理学中数据最丰富和调查最充分的物质之一,但在风险评估中不考虑可能有毒的共制剂和具有潜在相关混合效应的ppp。这尤其适用于接触未稀释产品的操作人员。在这项研究中,我们通过使用新方法(NAMs)对共配方和ppp进行优先级测试来调查这一问题。我们将共制剂肾毒性和肝毒性的计算机预测与AS和共制剂动力学相互作用预测相结合,从而确定了427种ppp供进一步研究。接下来,研究人员评估了6种PPP对肝细胞的AS和PPP毒性。一个产品显示了超过加性效应,因此测试了在硅预测动力学相互作用。虽然渗透性糖蛋白(P-gp)相互作用尚未得到证实,但观察到的效果可能归因于CYP2C19相互作用。总之,研究结果强调,使用硅工具作为筛选步骤有助于限制PPPs进一步测试的数量。随后对数量有限的ppp进行的体外测试支持了可加性概念的应用,并强调了优先的共制剂具有可加性。我们建议将这些共制剂整合到目前应用于活性物质联合风险评估的危害指数(HI)方法中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Archives of Toxicology
Archives of Toxicology 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
4.90%
发文量
218
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: Archives of Toxicology provides up-to-date information on the latest advances in toxicology. The journal places particular emphasis on studies relating to defined effects of chemicals and mechanisms of toxicity, including toxic activities at the molecular level, in humans and experimental animals. Coverage includes new insights into analysis and toxicokinetics and into forensic toxicology. Review articles of general interest to toxicologists are an additional important feature of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信