•This publication is designed to update the RIFM safety assessment process, which follows a series of decision trees.•This process incorporates advances in approaches in risk assessment used by RIFM ...over the past ten years.•A framework for choosing structural analogs and consideration of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) are included.•Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) for dermal sensitization and aggregate exposure assessment methodologies are included.•The latest alternatives to animal testing methodology and environmental risk assessment are included.
The Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM) has been engaged in the generation and evaluation of safety data for fragrance materials since its inception over 45 years ago. Over time, RIFM's approach to gathering data, estimating exposure and assessing safety has evolved as the tools for risk assessment evolved. This publication is designed to update the RIFM safety assessment process, which follows a series of decision trees, reflecting advances in approaches in risk assessment and new and classical toxicological methodologies employed by RIFM over the past ten years. These changes include incorporating 1) new scientific information including a framework for choosing structural analogs, 2) consideration of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC), 3) the Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) for dermal sensitization, 4) the respiratory route of exposure, 5) aggregate exposure assessment methodology, 6) the latest methodology and approaches to risk assessments, 7) the latest alternatives to animal testing methodology and 8) environmental risk assessment. The assessment begins with a thorough analysis of existing data followed by in silico analysis, identification of ‘read across’ analogs, generation of additional data through in vitro testing as well as consideration of the TTC approach. If necessary, risk management may be considered.
1,1,2-Trifluoroethene (HFO-1123) is anticipated for use as a refrigerant with low global warming potential. Inhalation studies on HFO-1123 in rats indicated a low potential for toxicity (NOAELs ≥ ...20,000 ppm). In contrast, single inhalation exposure of Goettingen
®
minipigs (≥ 500 ppm) and New Zealand white rabbits (≥ 1250 ppm) resulted in severe toxicity. It has been suggested that these pronounced species-differences in toxicity may be attributable to species-differences in biotransformation of HFO-1123 via the mercapturic acid pathway. Therefore, the overall objective of this study was to evaluate species-differences in glutathione (GSH) dependent in vitro metabolism of HFO-1123 in susceptible versus less susceptible species and humans as a basis for human risk assessment. Biotransformation of HFO-1123 to
S
-(1,1,2-trifluoroethyl)-
L
-glutathione (1123-GSH) and subsequent cysteine S-conjugate β-lyase-mediated cleavage of the corresponding cysteine conjugate (1123-CYS) was monitored in hepatic and renal subcellular fractions of mice, rats, minipigs, rabbits, and humans. While 1123-GSH formation occurred at higher rates in rat and rabbit liver S9 compared to minipig and human S9, increased β-lyase cleavage of 1123-CYS was observed in minipig kidney cytosol as compared to cytosolic fractions of other species. Increased β-lyase activity in minipig cytosol was accompanied by time-dependent formation of monofluoroacetic acid (MFA), a highly toxic compound that interferes with cellular energy production via inhibition of aconitase. Consistent with the significantly lower β-lyase activity in human cytosols, the intensity of the MFA signal in human cytosols was only a fraction of the signal obtained in minipig subcellular fractions. Even though the inconsistencies between GSH and β-lyase-dependent metabolism do not allow to draw a firm conclusion on the overall contribution of the mercapturic acid pathway to HFO-1123 biotransformation and toxicity in vivo, the β-lyase data suggest that humans may be less susceptible to HFO-1123 toxicity compared to minipigs.
•Acetyl cedrene; a safety assessment based on RIFM's criteria.•A safety assessment based on 7 human health endpoints plus environmental.•All endpoints were cleared using target data, read-across, ...and/or TTC.
During the last two decades, substantial efforts have been made towards the development and international acceptance of alternative methods to safety studies using laboratory animals. In the EU, ...challenging timelines for phasing out of many standard tests using laboratory animals were established in the seventh Amending Directive 2003/15/EC to Cosmetics Directive 76/768/EEC. In continuation of this policy, the new European Chemicals Legislation (REACH) favours alternative methods to conventional in vivo testing, if validated and appropriate. Even alternative methods in the status of prevalidation or validation, but without scientific or regulatory acceptance may be used under certain conditions. Considerable progress in the establishment of alternative methods has been made in some fields, in particular with respect to methods predicting local toxic effects and genotoxicity. In more complex important fields of safety and risk assessment such as systemic single and repeated dose toxicity, toxicokinetics, sensitisation, reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, it is expected that the development and validation of in silico methods, testing batteries (in vitro and in silico) and tiered testing systems will have to overcome many scientific and regulatory obstacles which makes it extremely difficult to predict the outcome and the time needed. The main reasons are the complexity and limited knowledge of the biological processes involved on one hand and the long time frame until validation and regulatory acceptance of an alternative method on the other. New approaches in safety testing and evaluation using “Integrated Testing Strategies” (ITS) (including combinations of existing data, the use of chemical categories/grouping, in vitro tests and QSAR) that have not been validated or not gained wide acceptance in the scientific community and by regulatory authorities will need a thorough justification of their appropriateness for a given purpose. This requires the availability of knowledge and experience of experts in toxicology. The challenging deadlines for phasing out of in vivo tests in the Cosmetics Amending Directive 2003/15/EC appear unrealistic. Likewise, we expect that the application of validated alternative methods will only have a small or moderate impact on the reduction of in vivo tests under the regimen of REACH, provided that at least the same level of protection of human health as in the past is envisaged. As a consequence, under safety aspects, it appears wise to consider established in vivo tests to be indispensable as basic tools for hazard and risk assessment with respect to systemic single and repeated dose toxicity, sensitisation, carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity, especially regarding quantitative aspects of risk assessment such as NOAELs, LOAELs and health-related limit values derived from them. Based on the overall evaluation in this review, the authors are of the opinion that in the short- and mid-term, the strategy of the development of alternative methods should be more directed towards the refinement or reduction of in vivo tests. The lessons learnt during these efforts will provide a substantial contribution towards the replacement initiatives in the long-term.
•Benzenepropanol, a,ß-dimethyl-; a safety assessment based on RIFM's criteria.•A safety assessment based on 7 human health endpoints plus environmental.•All endpoints were cleared using target data, ...read-across, and/or TTC.
•α-Propylphenethyl alcohol; a safety assessment based on RIFM's criteria.•A safety assessment based on 7 human health endpoints plus environmental.•All endpoints were cleared using target data, ...read-across, and/or TTC.
•Isobornyl propionate; a safety assessment based on RIFM's criteria.•A safety assessment based on 7 human health endpoints plus environmental.•All endpoints were cleared using target data, ...read-across, and/or TTC.
•Tetrahydrogeranial; a safety assessment based on RIFM's criteria.•A safety assessment based on 7 human health endpoints plus environmental.•All endpoints were cleared using target data, read-across, ...and/or TTC.
•3,7-Dimethyl-7-methoxyoctan-2-ol; a safety assessment based on RIFM's criteria.•A safety assessment based on 7 human health endpoints plus environmental.•All endpoints were cleared using target ...data, read-across, and/or TTC.
