Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Aug:151:105665.
doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2024.105665. Epub 2024 Jun 15.

Review of dose setting for the extended one-generation reproductive toxicity studies (OECD TG 443): Considerations on ECHA's dose level selection recommendations

Affiliations
Free article
Review

Review of dose setting for the extended one-generation reproductive toxicity studies (OECD TG 443): Considerations on ECHA's dose level selection recommendations

Manon Beekhuijzen et al. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2024 Aug.
Free article

Abstract

During 2020, The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) began evaluating the OECD Test Guideline 443: Extended One Generation Reproductive Toxicity Study (EOGRTS) to analyze specific aspects related to study design, conduct and toxicological findings. A significant outcome of this ECHA evaluation focused on adequate dose level selection. Subsequently, ECHA published recommendations for DART studies, however, these recommendations seemingly do not align with the principles of the 3Rs, animal welfare or human safety goals, specifically, regarding three aspects. First, the requirement to segregate testing for sexual function and fertility from the ability to produce normally developing offspring increases the risk of inadequate identification of postnatal hazards for development and sexual function and fertility, therefore failing human health protection goals. Second, the current ECHA high-dose level setting recommendations for EOGRTS exceed the MTD (Maximum Tolerated Dose), and therefore compromise the interpretation of the biological response relative to the intrinsic effect of the chemical under evaluation. Third, the combination of these aspects will result in an increase in the number of animals tested, increasing animal welfare concerns. This paper reflects the consensus of subject matter experts, professional, and scientific societies who have authored and signed on to this statement. The signatories encourage ECHA to adopt a revised science-driven approach to the dose selection criteria that strikes a balance between regulatory vigilance and scientific pragmatism.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interest The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The following authors are employed in the pharmaceutical, chemical or agrochemical industries (at the time of article submission): Manon Beekhuijzen is an employee at Charles River Laboratories. Emily Richmond is an employee at Exponent International Ltd. Jason Manton is an employee at Toxiqua Ltd and was an employee at Exponent International Ltd. Pragati Coder is an employee at Charles River Laboratories Ashland LLC. Katy Goyak was an employee ExxonMobil Biomedical Sciences. Rashin Ghaffari is an employee at Corteva Agriscience. Susan L. Makris is retiree of the US Environmental Protection Agency. Leah Zorrilla is an employee at Bayer Crop Science.

Substances

LinkOut - more resources