ELLEN MIHAICH, PH.D., DABT ENVIRONMENTAL AND REGULATORY RESOURCES ISRTP WORKSHOP DECEMBER 13, 2010 EDSP Test Guidelines and Guideline Modifications 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Perspectives from EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program
Advertisements

A Two-Tiered-Testing Decision Tree for Assays in the USEPA-EDSP Screening Battery: Using 15 years of experience to improve screening and testing for endocrine.
Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program: Ralph L. Cooper Endocrinology Branch Reproductive Toxicology Division NHEERL, U.S. EPA Male and Female Pubertal.
Evaluating Existing in vitro Endocrine Data Jeff Pregenzer, Director of Endocrine Studies, CeeTox.
UNEP Advisory Group Meeting Geneva, Switzerland December 12, 2014
Richard A. Becker, Ph.D., D.A.B.T American Chemistry Council Arlington, Virginia Comments on “Dose Setting” EDMVS Meeting July 23-24, 2002.
Session III: Assessing Cumulative Effects of Endocrine Active Substances 9:15 - 9:30 Introduction” Rick Becker (Session Chair and Panel Moderator) 9:30.
June 2010 LANDSIEDEL 1 Chemical Industries Role in Tomorrows Toxicity Testing Robert Landsiedel, Susanne Kolle, Tzutzuy Ramirez, Hennicke Kamp and Ben.
Priority-setting for the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program: Pesticide Active Ingredients Penelope A. Fenner-Crisp Office of Pesticide Programs U.S.
National Pesticide Program A New Toxicology Testing Paradigm: Meeting Common Needs Steven Bradbury, Director Environmental Fate and Effects Division Office.
Endocrine Screening – Phase 1 TSCA 8(e) and FIFRA 6(a)(2) Requirements A. Michael Kaplan, Ph.D. December 13, 2010 A. Michael Kaplan & Associates, LLC
Comments Regarding Nipples/Areolae Retention Endpoint Barbara Neal, DABT BBL Sciences.
John C. O’Connor DuPont Haskell Laboratory for Health and Environmental Sciences The 15-Day Intact Adult Male Assay As An Alternative Tier I Screening.
RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute The International Society of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology (ISRTP)
EDSP Validation Gary E.Timm Senior Technical Advisor Office of Science Coordination and Policy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
NSF/ANSI STANDARD 61 FRAMEWORK FOR RISK ASSESSMENTS For use by Toxicology Sub-committee only Please do not copy or distribute.
Factors Affecting Distribution and Metabolism. Chemical Factors Lipophilicity Structure Ionization Chirality.
Chapter 10 Reproductive Behaviors
Fish Screening Assay Detailed Review Paper NACEPT Endocrine Disruptor Methods Validation Subcommittee March 2002 Les Touart.
Assessing the Impact of Body Weight on Male and Female Pubertal Development EPA Special Study Tammy Stoker, PhD. Gamete and Early Embryo Biology Branch.
Hormones and Sexuality – Part 1
Criteria for Screens— Review of the EDSTAC Recommendations Presentation to the EDMVS July 23, 2002.
What Information Fulfills EDSP Screening Requirements?
The Intact Male Assay As An Alternative Tier I Screening Assay For Detecting Endocrine-Active Compounds John C. O’Connor DuPont Haskell Laboratory for.
Status of the U.S. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) Status of the U.S. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) September
Prevalidation Study Plan for Sliced Testes Assay Gary Timm Presented to EDMVS August 20, 2003.
Office of Pesticide Programs 21st Century Screening Assessment of Pesticides – A Regulatory View Vicki Dellarco, Ph.D. Senior Science Advisor Office of.
EDSP’s Approach to Test Protocol Validation Office of Science Coordination and Policy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Nonclinical Perspective on Initiating Phase 1 Studies for Small Molecular Weight Compounds John K. Leighton, PH.D., DABT Supervisory Pharmacologist Division.
Biomedical Research Objective 2 Biomedical Research Methods.
Biomedical Research.
Quill Law Group LLC1 EDSP Compliance Timing, Procedural and Legal Issues Terry F. Quill Quill Law Group LLC 1667 K St, NW Washington, DC
Slide 1 of 24 EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) Use of Exposure Data in Priority Setting Bill Wooge Office of Science Coordination and.
Endocrine disrupters. Endocrine disruption Endocrine disrupters (ED) or endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC) are exogenous chemical agents that interfere.
1 Tier 1 EDSP: Other Scientifically Relevant Information Barbara Neal Exponent December 13, 2010.
Wildlife Screens What Do They Tell Us? Dr. Pat Guiney Manager Global Safety, Regulatory & Environmental Assessment S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. Racine, WI.
Determining the Effect of Triclosan on the Growth of Cancer Cells Lydia Alf and Winnifred Bryant Ph. D. Department of Biology University of Wisconsin,
Which information identifies a chemical as endocrine disrupting? Poul Bjerregaard Institute of Biology University of Southern Denmark Odense and Danish.
MAIN TOXICITY TESTING. TESTING STRATEGIES A number of different types of data are used in order to establish the safety of chemical substances for use.
0 Focusing on the Adverse Outcomes of ER-mediated Pathways Rodney Johnson ORD/MED McKim Conference September 16-18, 2008.
Communications and the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program ISRTP Workshop December 13, 2010.
MECHANISTIC MODEL OF STEROIDOGENESIS IN FISH OVARIES TO PREDICT BIOCHEMICAL RESPONSE TO ENDOCRINE ACTIVE CHEMICALS Michael S. Breen, 1 Miyuki Breen, 2.
Quill Law Group LLC1 EDSP Implementation Business and Legal Considerations Terry F. Quill Quill Law Group LLC 1667 K St, NW Washington, DC
COMPARABILITY PROTOCOLUPDATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCE Manufacturing Subcommittee July 20-21, 2004 Stephen Moore, Ph.D. Chemistry Team.
EDSP: T IER 1 T ESTING I NFORMATION C OLLECTION ISRTP 2010 Endocrine Workshop EDSP Compliance December 13, 2010 Susan Ferenc, DVM, Ph.D.
META-ANALYSIS, RESEARCH SYNTHESES AND SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS © LOUIS COHEN, LAWRENCE MANION & KEITH MORRISON.
Christopher J. Borgert, PhD Weight of Evidence Determinations for EPA’s EDSP ISRTP Workshop, December 13 Lister Hill Auditorium, Bethesda, MD.
Introduction to Session II: Incorporating Existing Data into the EDSP Erik R. Janus Director, Human Health Policy CropLife America.
Toxicological Knowledge Base (a Definition) Response Dose “ An in computero aggregated set of the most germane literature citations and biological activity.
Consider Incorporating Respiratory Safety Pharmacology Measurements into Your Next Repeat Dose Toxicology Study September 14, 2012 Jeff Tepper, PhD, DABT.
Models, Markers and Mechanisms: Understanding Endocrine Disruptor Effects Brent D. Palmer, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Environmental Biology Department.
Endocrine System. The Endocrine System consists of: that secrete GlandsHormones.
The Future of Chemical Toxicity Testing in the U.S.
McKim Conference on Predictive Toxicology The Inn of Lake Superior Duluth, Minnesota September 25-27, 2007 Toxicity Pathways as an Organizing Concept Gilman.
Androgens -Role in males similar to the of estrogens in females - development of male sexual characteristics - stimulating protein synthesis, growth of.
Perspective on the current state-of-knowledge of mode of action as it relates to the dose response assessment of cancer and noncancer toxicity Jennifer.
Natural and environmental estrogens
Development of Toxicity Indicators Steven Bay Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP)
MEASUREMENT OF TOXICITY By, Dr. M. David Department of Zoology, Karnatak University Dharwad.
Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing: An Industry Update
BIOASSAY OF OESTROGENS
Susan Makris U.S. EPA, Office of Research and Development
Which information identifies a chemical as endocrine disrupting?
BIOASSAY OF OESTROGENS
Comments on Using Existing Data for the Endocrine Screening Testing Lorenz Rhomberg, PhD Principal Gradient ISRTP 2009 Endocrine Workshop.
Hormones Biology 12.
Mammalian Tier I EDSP Screening Assays: What do they tell us?
Objective 2 Biomedical Research Methods
Presentation transcript:

ELLEN MIHAICH, PH.D., DABT ENVIRONMENTAL AND REGULATORY RESOURCES ISRTP WORKSHOP DECEMBER 13, 2010 EDSP Test Guidelines and Guideline Modifications 1

Courtesy of Tim Ward-ABC Laboratories 2

890 Series In Vitro Screens 3 Tier 1 AssayGuidelinePurpose Estrogen Receptor (ER) Binding Assay USEPA An ER binding assay that utilizes rat uterine cytosol to examine the ability of a test chemical to bind with estrogen receptors Estrogen Receptor Transcriptional Activation Assay USEPA OECD 455 An second type of ER binding assay that uses a human cell line to examine the ability of a test chemical to bind with estrogen receptors and alter gene transcription Androgen Receptor (AR) Binding Assay USEPA An AR binding assay that utilizes rat prostate cytosol to examine the ability of a test chemical to bind with androgen receptors Aromatase AssayUSEPA Aromatase is an enzyme complex responsible for estrogen biosynthesis that converts androgens into estrogens, estradiol, and estrone. The Aromatase in vitro assay uses a human recombinant form of the protein and focuses on this portion of the steroidogenic pathway to detect substances that inhibit aromatase activity. Steroidogenesis AssayUSEPA The Steroidogenesis in vitro assay utilizes the H295R human adrenocortical carcinoma cell line to detect interference with the body’s production of male and female steroid sex hormones (estrogen and testosterone).

890 Series In Vivo Screens 4 Tier 1 AssayGuidelinePurpose Uterotrophic Assay USEPA OECD 440 Ovariectomised or immature female rats are used to screen for estrogenic effects by measuring uterine weight changes. Hershberger Assay USEPA OECD 441 Designed to detect chemicals that are androgenic, anti- androgenic or inhibit 5α-reductase. Accessory sex gland weights, including several androgen-dependent tissues, are measured in castrated or immature male rats Male Pubertal AssayUSEPA Androgenic, anti-androgenic, and thyroid activity is screened in male rats during sexual maturation. Abnormalities associated with sex organs and puberty markers, as well as thyroid tissue are examined. Female Pubertal AssayUSEPA Estrogenic and thyroid activity is screened in female rats during sexual maturation. This assay examines abnormalities associated with sex organs and puberty markers, as well as thyroid tissue. Fish Short-Term Reproduction Assay USEPA OECD 229 Screens for estrogenic and androgenic effects. The assay examines abnormalities associated with survival, reproductive behavior, secondary sex characteristics, histopathology, and fecundity (i.e., number of spawns, number of eggs/spawn, fertility, and development of offspring) of fish exposed to test chemicals. Amphibian Metamorphosis Assay USEPA OECD 231 Involves the use of tadpoles to determine if chemicals affect the thyroid during metamorphosis and consequently result in developmental effects.

Test Order Restriction Requirement to perform screens according to 890 series guideline “…you may not deviate from an approved testing protocol unless you first consult with the Agency and obtain Agency approval of any planned deviation.” 5

General and Specific Guideline Issues Primarily hitting the high points of some of the screens today For more information please see the Test Guideline comments sent by the EPF in the EPA docket: EPA-HQ-OPP

General Guideline Issues *No public review of guidelines prior to publication Very prescriptive and inflexible Test validity criteria too stringent Sensitivity and specificity issues Typographical errors No standard evaluation procedures No defined Weight of Evidence Procedures for the battery 7

ER and AR Binding Assays Shortcomings  No metabolic capability  Impacted by pH, denaturation, precipitates and particulates  Cannot distinguish agonists/antagonists Validation and Guideline Issues  Inconsistency in rat uterine cytosol preparation  Inconsistency in cytosolic prostate gland preparation  Numerous typographical errors 8

ER Transcriptional Activation Shortcomings  No metabolic capability Validation and Guideline Issues  Only validated for ER agonists  Limited validation and false positive rate high  EPA’s recommendation for positive response (PC10) deviates from peer review recommendation  EPA’s acceptable lower level of dynamic range of 4- fold induction raises issue of distinguishing from background noise 9

Aromatase (Human Recombinant) Shortcomings  No metabolic capability  Impacted by denaturation of protein Validation and Guideline Issues  Limited validation  Numerous typographical errors 10

Steroidogenesis (Human Cell Line) Shortcomings  Cytotoxicity confounds results  Presence of any detergent residue on glassware can confound assay results Validation and Guideline Issues  High variability between laboratories during validation make the results difficult to interpret  The guideline is poorly organized with no stated purpose – more of a protocol than guidance  Very small pipetting volumes could lead to errors  Parallel evaluation of cytotoxicity needed. Guideline permits up to 20% cytotoxicity while ICCVAM recommended only 10% 11

Uterotrophic Shortcomings  Route of administration and animal model compared to relevance Validation and Guideline Issues  While there are references to the anti-estrogenic component of the study, there has been no validation of this and anti-estrogenicity should not be assessed  Dose route and animal model preferences not harmonized with OECD - environmental relevance and metabolism should be considered 12

Hershberger Validation and Guideline Issues  Wide inter-laboratory variation in the mean age at which preputial separation occurs  Clarity needed for the interpretation of study with and without optional endpoints  EPA recommends use of multivariate analyses of all accessory sex organ weights in cases where only a single tissue gives a significant response; such post- hoc analyses are useful for hypothesis generation, but should not be used in hypothesis testing  Anesthetic agent and euthanizing method should be chosen carefully to avoid artifacts if performing optional steroid measurement  CV’s for control and high dose organ weights should be reported. Deviation of more than 3 could result in study rejection 13

Pubertals Shortcomings  High sensitivity but low specificity  Apical endpoints provide only limited information on the mode of action for potential endocrine-active chemicals  Significant inherent biological variability in the endpoints (puberty onset, estrous cycle, organ weights) complicates interpretation Validation and Guideline Issues  Validation studies did not demonstrate a negative response using a true negative control agent  Dose selection is critical to avoid non-specific outcomes 14

Amphibian Metamorphosis Shortcomings  Apical endpoints with unknown specificity  Poorly soluble or unstable compounds difficult to test  Not a short screen Validation and Guideline Issues  No known negative compounds  Dose setting guidance needed  Background levels of iodide in food and water may make comparison between labs difficult  Developmental staging 15

Fish Short-Term Reproduction Shortcomings  Multiple modes of action detected – apical endpoints  Medium sensitivity, low specificity  Long and expensive “screen” Validation and Guideline Issues  High variability observed in plasma sex steroids suggests they are not particularly robust endpoints  Statistical power of the fecundity endpoint is low  Limited quantities of blood plasma may require prioritization of most robust measurements, such as vitellogenin, rather than sex steroids  Dose setting is critical to avoid confusing systemic toxicity with genuine endocrine-mediated effects 16

Sensitivity and Specificity The Series TG (fish assay) states: "It is recognized that some endpoints may be responsive to nonendocrine stresses in addition to endocrine-mediated pathways, particularly fecundity. Although reductions in fecundity indicate adverse organismal and, potentially, population level effects (i.e., reproductive toxicity), these cannot be definitively distinguished from direct endocrine- mediated effects by this assay when changes in other core endpoints are not present. Nevertheless, reductions in fecundity are considered a positive effect in this assay because they may be endocrine-mediated..." 17

Staging the Conduct of the Screens 18 Stage 1 Estrogen Receptor (ER) Binding Androgen Receptor Binding ER Transcriptional Activation Uterotrophic Assay Hershberger Assay Stage 2 Aromatase Assay Steroidogenesis Assay Stage 3 Male Pubertal Assay Female Pubertal Assay Stage 4 Fish Short-Term Reproduction Assay Amphibian Metamorphosis Assay

Summary The current US EPA EDSP falls short in meeting many of the attributes of an efficient and effective screening program.  Many of the assays are not mechanistic, and some have yet to be shown to meet the basic requirement of distinguishing an endocrine active substance from a negative control or differentiating potential endocrine-mediated responses from responses via other modes of action (e.g. hepatotoxicity) or systemic toxicity.  The prescriptive nature of the guidelines combined with typographical errors, overly conservative validity criteria, and inflexible test order requirements likely mandate protocol approval prior to conducting the tier 1 battery 19

Summary-cont. A staged approach to the performance of the screens may improve the interpretability of the results, increasing the efficiency of the work and clarity of the results.  Efficiency and clarity are essential because interpretation of the entire battery is the determinant for proceeding to Tier 2. While staging the EDSP ESB may improve interpretation as to whether a substance may interact with components of the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid hormone systems, such activities cannot overcome inherent limitations of the tier 1 screens. 20

EPA EDSP ESB Test Guidelines can be accessed at /Test_Guidelines/series890.htm /Test_Guidelines/series890.htm 21