{"title":"CEC05-02风险评估方法","authors":"D. Nikolopoulou","doi":"10.1016/j.toxlet.2025.07.031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Risk assessment is a specialized field of applied science that involves reviewing scientific data in order to evaluate risks associated with certain hazards (EFSA glossary<span><span><sup>[1]</sup></span></span>). A hands-on training activity on selected methodologies implemented in human health risk assessment will be offered during the Continuous Educational Course (CEC05) on <em>“Regulatory Toxicology in the context of the EU Legislations”</em>. The session will include an introductory presentation and practical exercise on methodologies used in risk assessment of pesticides in the frames of Regulation No. (EC) 1107/2009 and No. (EU) 528/2012. The aim of this activity is to describe how adversity is assessed in key regulatory studies, demonstrate how all available scientific data can be used in weight-of-evidence assessments integrating non-animal approaches. The identification of endocrine disruptors will be used as a specific example.</div><div>Weight of evidence (WoE) assessment is a structured approach for transparent and scientifically robust evaluation of the available data. Evaluation of endocrine-disrupting properties using comprehensive WoE assessment is outlined in the respective EFSA/ECHA Guidance (2018). The assessment process includes (i) collecting the evidence, by gathering data from various sources, such as <em>in vitro</em> and <em>in vivo</em> studies, databases, and computational models, to identify potential endocrine adversity and activity; (ii) developing lines of evidence, where collected data are organized into coherent lines taking into consideration reliability, relevance and consistency, and (iii) integrating the evidence by analyzing lines of evidence while assessing uncertainties.</div><div>New approach methodologies (NAMs) enhance the reliability of risk assessments while reducing the need for animal testing. NAMs may include but are not limited to Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOP), readacross, <em>in silico</em>, <em>in chemico</em>, and <em>in vitro</em> methodologies, omics and other systems biology-based approaches, and combinations of these in defined approaches or integrated approaches in testing and assessment</div><div>(IATAs). Distinguishing between threshold and non-threshold modes of action is critical in hazard characterisation of substances. Hazard characterisation of endocrine disruptors is a concept of scientific and regulatory debate. Development of quantitative AOPs (qAOPs) is expected to provide scientific support towards this approach.</div><div>Reviewing risk assessment methodologies including mapping of current practices, uptake of new scientific and technological advancements and identification of areas for improvement is a key task in the European Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals (PARC). Overall, by integrating scientific concepts in practical exercises participants will enhance their understanding of transparent and reliable risk assessment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23206,"journal":{"name":"Toxicology letters","volume":"411 ","pages":"Pages S10-S11"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"CEC05-02 Risk Assessment Methodologies\",\"authors\":\"D. Nikolopoulou\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.toxlet.2025.07.031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Risk assessment is a specialized field of applied science that involves reviewing scientific data in order to evaluate risks associated with certain hazards (EFSA glossary<span><span><sup>[1]</sup></span></span>). A hands-on training activity on selected methodologies implemented in human health risk assessment will be offered during the Continuous Educational Course (CEC05) on <em>“Regulatory Toxicology in the context of the EU Legislations”</em>. The session will include an introductory presentation and practical exercise on methodologies used in risk assessment of pesticides in the frames of Regulation No. (EC) 1107/2009 and No. (EU) 528/2012. The aim of this activity is to describe how adversity is assessed in key regulatory studies, demonstrate how all available scientific data can be used in weight-of-evidence assessments integrating non-animal approaches. The identification of endocrine disruptors will be used as a specific example.</div><div>Weight of evidence (WoE) assessment is a structured approach for transparent and scientifically robust evaluation of the available data. Evaluation of endocrine-disrupting properties using comprehensive WoE assessment is outlined in the respective EFSA/ECHA Guidance (2018). The assessment process includes (i) collecting the evidence, by gathering data from various sources, such as <em>in vitro</em> and <em>in vivo</em> studies, databases, and computational models, to identify potential endocrine adversity and activity; (ii) developing lines of evidence, where collected data are organized into coherent lines taking into consideration reliability, relevance and consistency, and (iii) integrating the evidence by analyzing lines of evidence while assessing uncertainties.</div><div>New approach methodologies (NAMs) enhance the reliability of risk assessments while reducing the need for animal testing. NAMs may include but are not limited to Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOP), readacross, <em>in silico</em>, <em>in chemico</em>, and <em>in vitro</em> methodologies, omics and other systems biology-based approaches, and combinations of these in defined approaches or integrated approaches in testing and assessment</div><div>(IATAs). Distinguishing between threshold and non-threshold modes of action is critical in hazard characterisation of substances. Hazard characterisation of endocrine disruptors is a concept of scientific and regulatory debate. Development of quantitative AOPs (qAOPs) is expected to provide scientific support towards this approach.</div><div>Reviewing risk assessment methodologies including mapping of current practices, uptake of new scientific and technological advancements and identification of areas for improvement is a key task in the European Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals (PARC). Overall, by integrating scientific concepts in practical exercises participants will enhance their understanding of transparent and reliable risk assessment.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23206,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Toxicology letters\",\"volume\":\"411 \",\"pages\":\"Pages S10-S11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Toxicology letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378427425016145\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"TOXICOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicology letters","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378427425016145","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
风险评估是应用科学的一个专门领域,涉及审查科学数据以评估与某些危害相关的风险(EFSA术语表[1])。在关于“欧盟立法背景下的管制毒理学”的继续教育课程(CEC05)期间,将提供关于在人类健康风险评估中实施的选定方法的实践培训活动。会议将包括介绍性介绍和实践练习,介绍在第6号法规框架内用于农药风险评估的方法。(EC) 1107/2009(欧盟)528/2012。本活动的目的是描述如何在关键的监管研究中评估逆境,展示如何将所有可用的科学数据用于整合非动物方法的证据权重评估。内分泌干扰物的鉴定将作为一个具体的例子。证据权重(WoE)评估是对现有数据进行透明和科学可靠评估的结构化方法。EFSA/ECHA指南(2018)中概述了使用综合WoE评估来评估内分泌干扰特性。评估过程包括(i)收集证据,从各种来源收集数据,如体外和体内研究、数据库和计算模型,以确定潜在的内分泌逆境和活动;(ii)形成证据线,将收集到的数据组织成连贯的证据线,同时考虑到可靠性、相关性和一致性;(iii)在评估不确定性的同时,通过分析证据线来整合证据。新的方法方法(NAMs)提高了风险评估的可靠性,同时减少了对动物试验的需求。NAMs可能包括但不限于Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOP), readacross, in silico, in chemical, and in vitro methodology, omics和其他基于系统生物学的方法,以及这些方法在定义方法或测试和评估综合方法(iata)中的组合。区分阈值和非阈值作用模式对物质的危害特征至关重要。内分泌干扰物的危害特征是一个科学和监管争论的概念。定量AOPs (qAOPs)的开发有望为这一方法提供科学支持。欧洲化学品风险评估伙伴关系(PARC)的一项关键任务是审查风险评估方法,包括绘制当前实践图、吸收新的科学和技术进步以及确定需要改进的领域。总的来说,通过将科学概念融入实际练习,参与者将增强他们对透明和可靠的风险评估的理解。
Risk assessment is a specialized field of applied science that involves reviewing scientific data in order to evaluate risks associated with certain hazards (EFSA glossary[1]). A hands-on training activity on selected methodologies implemented in human health risk assessment will be offered during the Continuous Educational Course (CEC05) on “Regulatory Toxicology in the context of the EU Legislations”. The session will include an introductory presentation and practical exercise on methodologies used in risk assessment of pesticides in the frames of Regulation No. (EC) 1107/2009 and No. (EU) 528/2012. The aim of this activity is to describe how adversity is assessed in key regulatory studies, demonstrate how all available scientific data can be used in weight-of-evidence assessments integrating non-animal approaches. The identification of endocrine disruptors will be used as a specific example.
Weight of evidence (WoE) assessment is a structured approach for transparent and scientifically robust evaluation of the available data. Evaluation of endocrine-disrupting properties using comprehensive WoE assessment is outlined in the respective EFSA/ECHA Guidance (2018). The assessment process includes (i) collecting the evidence, by gathering data from various sources, such as in vitro and in vivo studies, databases, and computational models, to identify potential endocrine adversity and activity; (ii) developing lines of evidence, where collected data are organized into coherent lines taking into consideration reliability, relevance and consistency, and (iii) integrating the evidence by analyzing lines of evidence while assessing uncertainties.
New approach methodologies (NAMs) enhance the reliability of risk assessments while reducing the need for animal testing. NAMs may include but are not limited to Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOP), readacross, in silico, in chemico, and in vitro methodologies, omics and other systems biology-based approaches, and combinations of these in defined approaches or integrated approaches in testing and assessment
(IATAs). Distinguishing between threshold and non-threshold modes of action is critical in hazard characterisation of substances. Hazard characterisation of endocrine disruptors is a concept of scientific and regulatory debate. Development of quantitative AOPs (qAOPs) is expected to provide scientific support towards this approach.
Reviewing risk assessment methodologies including mapping of current practices, uptake of new scientific and technological advancements and identification of areas for improvement is a key task in the European Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals (PARC). Overall, by integrating scientific concepts in practical exercises participants will enhance their understanding of transparent and reliable risk assessment.