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

利用 NAM 对辅料和植物保护产品进行非膳食风险评估的优先排序

阅读:9
作者:Stagkos-Georgiadis Alkiviadis, Baffour-Duah Bright, Tralau Tewes, Bloch Denise
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.

特别声明

1、本文转载旨在传播信息,不代表本网站观点,亦不对其内容的真实性承担责任。

2、其他媒体、网站或个人若从本网站转载使用,必须保留本网站注明的“来源”,并自行承担包括版权在内的相关法律责任。

3、如作者不希望本文被转载,或需洽谈转载稿费等事宜,请及时与本网站联系。

4、此外,如需投稿,也可通过邮箱info@biocloudy.com与我们取得联系。