Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. The photo image area is located 3.19” from left.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Slide 1 of 38 Office of Pesticide Programs Drs. Vicki Dellarco & Anna Lowit Health Effects Division Office of Pesticide Programs Mode of Action/ Human.
Advertisements

Dosimetry in Risk Assessment and a bit More Mel Andersen McKim Conference QSAR and Aquatic Toxicology & Risk Assessment June 27-29, 2006.
Mechanisms of Thyroid Toxicity Kevin M. Crofton Neurotoxicology Division National Health and Environmental Effects Laboratory US Environmental Protection.
Evaluation of a potential mutagenic MOA based on analysis of the weight of evidence and using the modified Hill criteria Martha M. Moore, Ph.D. Director,
Trichloroethylene (TCE) Toxicity Values Update Waste Site Cleanup Advisory Committee Meeting March 27, 2014 C. Mark Smith Ph.D., M.S. Deputy Director Office.
Regulatory Toxicology James Swenberg, D.V.M., Ph.D.
Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage strip.
Chemical Carcinogens – workplace risk assessment and health surveillance Tiina Santonen Paide.
Carcinogen Classification Criteria Patricia Richter Ph.D., DABT Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee June 8, 2010.
Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment and Supplemental Guidance for Assessing Cancer Risks from Early-Life Exposures March 29, 2005 Hugh A. Barton,
Using Science to Address Environmental Problems Chapter 2.
William H. Farland, Ph.D. Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science Office of Research and Development U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Biomarkers:
Sources of Uncertainty and Current Practice for Addressing Them: Toxicological Perspective David A. Bussard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency The views.
9/29/08 ESPP-781 Where does risk come from? A story from a small state in upstate New York.
1 Issues in Harmonizing Methods for Risk Assessment Kenny S. Crump Louisiana Tech University
Risk Assessment II Dec 9, Is there a “safe” dose ? For effects other than cancer:
Effectiveness Evaluation for Therapeutic Drugs for Non-Food Animals
June 16-19, USEPA Cancer Guidelines: Mode of Carcinogenic Action 1 ICABR – Impacts of the Bioeconomy on Agricultural Sustainability, the Environment.
Overall Objectives Demonstrate the existence of new modalities of toxic tissue injury with increasing dose using a series of representative case examples.
ILSI Risk Science Institute Acrylamide Toxicity: Research to Address Key Data Gaps Presented by Dr. Stephen S. Olin ILSI Risk Science Institute.
Environmental Risk Analysis
EPA’s cancer risk assessment guidelines: General overview Jim Cogliano, Ph.D. United States Environmental Protection Agency* Office of Research and Development.
Committee on Carcinogenicity (COC) Approach to Risk Assessment of Genotoxic Carcinogens David H. Phillips* COC Chairman Descriptive vs. Quantitative.
Air Quality Health Risk Assessment – Methodological Issues and Needs Presented to SAMSI September 19, 2007 Research Triangle Park, NC Anne E. Smith, Ph.D.
Dr. Manfred Wentz Director, Hohenstein Institutes (USA) Head, Oeko-Tex Certification Body (USA) AAFA – Environmental Committee Meeting November 10, 2008.
Resha M. Putzrath, Ph.D., DABT Health Science Coordinator Risk Assessment Forum, EPA/ORD/NCEA 2005 Toxicology and Risk Assessment Conference The 2005 Cancer.
Charge Question 5-1 Comment Summary for HHCB Peer Review Panel Meeting January 9, 2014.
1 Comparing Cancer Risks between Radiation and Dioxin Exposure Based on Two-Stage Model Tsuyoshi Nakamura Faculty of Environmental Studies, Nagasaki University.
From Mice to Men, Cancers Are Not Certain At Old Age Francesco Pompei, Ph.D. and Richard Wilson, D.Phil. Harvard University Presented at the Belle Non-Linear.
Animal Studies and Human Health Consequences Sorell L. Schwartz, Ph.D. Department of Pharmacology Georgetown University Medical Center.
LHP DRAFT ARA Workshop I1 Break-out Group B #5: Formaldehyde #12: IEUBK/Pb #26: Acrylamide Recommended all go forward (with funding considerations)
A Novel Bottom Up Approach to Bounding Potential Human Cancer Risks from Endogenous Chemicals Thomas B. Starr, PhD TBS Associates, Raleigh NC SOT RASS.
Risk Assessment Nov 7, 2008 Timbrell 3 rd Edn pp Casarett & Doull 7 th Edn Chapter 7 (pp )
Juan Alguacil, MD Huelva University Brussels, 26 June 2012 Limits on Occupational Exposure Limits for Carcinogens 8th Seminar on workers’ protection &
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.
MECHANISTIC MODEL OF STEROIDOGENESIS IN FISH OVARIES TO PREDICT BIOCHEMICAL RESPONSE TO ENDOCRINE ACTIVE CHEMICALS Michael S. Breen, 1 Miyuki Breen, 2.
Background on Furan in Foods Nega Beru, Ph.D. Director, Division of Plant Product Safety Office of Plant and Dairy Foods Center for Food and Applied Nutrition.
Chapter 2 Using Science to Address Environmental Problems.
The Hamner Institutes for Health Sciences | SOT Meeting March 9, 2011 Update on Formaldehyde Case Study: Adaptation of the Biologically Based Dose Response.
Risk Assessment.
Air Toxics Risk Assessment: Traditional versus New Approaches Mark Saperstein BP Product Stewardship Group.
Environmental Risk Analysis Chapter 6 © 2007 Thomson Learning/South-WesternCallan and Thomas, Environmental Economics and Management, 4e.
Office of Research and Development Photo image area measures 1.5” H x 7” and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. The photo image.
NUATRC/TCEQ Air Toxics Workshop October Air Toxics Air Toxics: What We Know, What we Don’t Know, and What We Need to Know Human Health Effects –
RISK DUE TO AIR POLLUTANTS
Case Study # 2  Problem Formulation  Inter-individual variability in cancer assessment (evaluate default from Silver Book)  Proposed Methods  Critical.
Environmental Risk Analysis Chapter 6 © 2004 Thomson Learning/South-Western.
Furan-Induced Cytotoxicity, Cell Proliferation, and Tumorgenicity in Mouse Liver Dr. Glenda Moser.
The Future of Chemical Toxicity Testing in the U.S.
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.
Office of Research and Development National Center for Environmental Assessment Human Health Risk Assessment and Information for SRP July 28, 2009 Reeder.
Key Concepts on Health Risk Assessment of Chemical Mixtures.
Office of Research and Development Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. The photo.
“Fit for Purpose” MOA/Human Relevance Analysis M.E. (Bette) Meek McLaughlin Centre University of Ottawa 1.
Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division Photo image area measures.
Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division Photo image area measures.
Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage.
Acute Toxicity Studies Single dose - rat, mouse (5/sex/dose), dog, monkey (1/sex/dose) 14 day observation In-life observations (body wt., food consumption,
Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division Photo image area measures.
1 Risk Assessment for Air Toxics: The 4 Basic Steps NESCAUM Health Effects Workshop Bordentown, NJ July 30, 2008.
Risk Assessment of Exposure to Trihalomethanes: Use of Biomonitoring Equivalents and Biomonitoring Data from NHANES Lesa L. AylwardRichard A. Becker Sean.
CHAPTER 5 Occupational Exposure Limits and Assessment of Workplace Chemical Risks.
FIFRA SAP Meeting February 2, 2010
Statistical Methods for Model Evaluation – Moving Beyond the Comparison of Matched Observations and Output for Model Grid Cells Kristen M. Foley1, Jenise.
THE DOSE MAKES THE POISON
Predicting Future-Year Ozone Concentrations: Integrated Observational-Modeling Approach for Probabilistic Evaluation of the Efficacy of Emission Control.
Risk Assessment Dec 7, 2009 Timbrell 3rd Edn pp 16-21
Case Study: Risk – Risk Comparison n-Propyl Bromide vs
with support from J.A. Swenberg & R. Budinsky
Using Mode of Action to Reduce Uncertainty in Risk Estimates
Presentation transcript:

Photo image area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be masked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. The photo image area is located 3.19” from left and 3.81” from top of page. Each image used in collage should be reduced or cropped to a maximum of 2” high, stroked with a 1.5 pt white frame and positioned edge-to-edge with accompanying images. Reeder Sams, Hisham El-Masri, Office of Research & Development USEPA Development of a Quantitative Model Incorporating Key Events in a Hepatotoxic MOA to Predict Tumor Incidence Disclaimer: This presentation has been reviewed by the EPA. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect EPA policy

1 Presentation Outline  Purpose  Biologically Based Dose Response Models  Human Health Risk Assessment Needs  Need for BBDR Models  Possible Avenues to Test Hypothesized MOAs  Development of a BBDR Model for a Cytotoxic MOA  Methods and Modeling (H El-Masri)  Results (H El-Masri)  Conclusions and Steps Forward (El-Masri &Sams)

2 Purpose for Developing BBDR Models? Help organize data and development of hypotheses Allow more robust testing of hypotheses and assumptions based on quantitative information (test MOA hypothesis) Inform shape of the dose response Extrapolate results and make predictions outside experimental conditions Assess relevance of animal model for human risk assessment

3 Quantitative Dose-response Assessment MOA informs low-dose extrapolation? MOA Established? BBDR model? 1. Fit data in observable range 2. Linear extrapolation from POD Use model RfD/RfC or MOE Yes Yes, nonlinear No Yes, linear (including mutagenic MOA)

4 MOA data: Challenges for BBDR Models Having sufficient information on MOA Interpretation of data when multiple modes of action are operative Application of well-established MOA from one chemical to another for which data are limited Determination of MOA data that are not relevant to humans Lack of dose-response information Separating chemical-induced events from natural progression of cancer

5 Mechanistically Based Models Bottom Line –A BBDR is only as accurate as the sum of its individual components. Uncertainty in key assumptions (e.g. MOA), parameters, variables, etc…. must be characterized in multiple predictive outputs.

Development of a Quantitative Model Incorporating Key Events in a Hepatotoxic Mode of Action to Predict Tumor Incidence Nicholas S. Luke*Nicholas S. Luke*, Reeder Sams II†Reeder Sams II†, Michael J. DeVito‡Michael J. DeVito‡, Rory B. Conolly§Rory B. Conolly§ and Hisham A. El-Masri§Hisham A. El-Masri§,11 1To whom correspondence should be addressed at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Mail Drop B143-01, Research Triangle Park, NC Fax: (919) el- 6

7 Hypothesized MOA: Cytotoxicity → Cellular Regeneration Multiple compounds proposed to induce tumors via cytotoxicity leading to cellular regeneration: –Chloroform –Carbon tetrachloride –1,4-Dioxane –Dimethylarsinic acid –Furan –N,N-Dimethyl formamide Multiple MOAs may be operative

8 Hypothesized MOA: Cytotoxicity → Cellular Regeneration Parent or Metabolite Hyperplasia Clonal expansion Cytotoxicity Regenerative Proliferation Tumors (e.g. liver, kidney) Sustained Identifiable (Measurable) Key Events

Choice of Pollutants for a Test Case BBDR Test case MOA based upon carcinogenicity endpoint Considerations for toxicodyamic data –Tumor data is available for numerous pollutants hypothesized to result from a cytotoxic MOA –Is there data for the hypothesized key events? –Limit other variables that may decrease accuracy of a BBDR model Route of exposure Site concordance Rodent species, strain, sex Laboratory Considerations for toxicokinetic data 9

Availability of Chemical-Specific Data PBPK ModelCytotoxictyProliferationTumor Data CCl CCL DMF Key Events (hypothesized)

11 Model Structure

12 Data Needs to Populate Model Pharmacokinetic Data –PBPK models for chloroform and carbon tetrachloride available in literature –Use of available data to develop a PBPK model for DMF Labeling Index Data – Multiple times – Dose Response Measure of Cytotoxicity – SDH, ALT, etc. Tumor Incidence Data – 2 yr bioassay – time to tumor (or intermediate time points)

13 Cytotoxicity Model

Cytotoxicity Model Parameters 14 ParameterDescriptionCHCl 3 CCl 4 DMF k dam Proportionality constant relating rate of metabolism to damage (damage units/mg/l) k dam Maximum repair capacity (damage units/h) 95.3 k1k1 Half-maximal damage (damage units) β ctrl Cell death rate of control liver (h −1 ) 7.7 × 10 −5 k1k1 Proportionality between amount of damage and death rate ([damage units × h] −1 ) 1.0 × 10 −6 Th Threshold level of damage (damage units) 6.97 α ctrl Cell division rate of control liver (h −1 ) 7.7 × 10 −5 N ctrl Number of cells in control liver 1.69 × 10 8f 1.69 × 10 8 α max Maximum possible division rate (h −1 ) 0.045

15 SDH and k dam From Lundberg et al., 1986 Table: Comparison of SDH and the parameter Linear slope (SDH to dose) Ratio to CHCL 3 CHCL CCL DMF

16 Cytotoxicity Results

17

18 Clonal Growth Model Three cell populations: Normal, Initiated, Malignant Cells move to next population via mutation Normal and Initiated populations undergo division and death/differentiation Malignant cells will lead to tumor after a delay.

Initiated Cell Growth 19 Initiated Cells Death disadvantage Initiated Cells Growth advantage OR

20 Tumor Incidences Simulations

21 Clonal Growth ParameterDescriptionCHCl 3 CCl 4 DMF μNμN Probability of a normal cell attaining a mutation 2.6 × 10 −9 μNμN Probability of an initiated cell attaining a mutation 2.6 × 10 −9 BD Death rate reduction for initiated cells GA Proliferation rate increase for initiated cells

22 Cellular Proliferation and Tumor Incidences CHCl 3 CCl 4 DMF Dose (ppm) Labeling index (%)18 Tumor incidence (%)

23 Conclusions Quantitative modeling was useful to assess a generalized MOA across chemicals: – CHCL 3,CCL 4 and DMF cytotoxic MOA SDH or other measures of cytotoxicity Labeling Indices Quantitative modeling indicates –Possibility of other key events –Possibility of multiple MOAs Identified data needs –Time to tumor data –“Initiated” cells: death and proliferation rates