Abstract:Toxicology and Industrial Health, Ahead of Print. Occupational exposure limits (OELs) and occupational exposure bands (OEBs) provide quantitative benchmarks for worker health protection. If empirical toxicology data are insufficient to derive an OEL, an OEB is often assigned using partial toxicology data along with other relevant hazard information. There is no consensus methodology to assign OEBs for chemicals lacking any empirical toxicology data. Thus, this study developed an in silico framework for OEB assignment of data poor compounds. It relies upon computational tools to evaluate standard toxicological end points and to assign reliability ratings, which are then used to assign Global Harmonization System (GHS) hazard categories. Subsequently, the hazard categories are entered into the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) occupational exposure banding tool to assign bands for individual end points as well as an overall OEB. As a proof-of-concept, five compounds with established OELs (i.e., "knowns") were evaluated. The knowns were assigned to overall OEBs C, D, or E, four of which were equal to or lower than the OEBs based on actual harmonized GHS categories as well as established OELs, indicating that the OEBs assigned using this framework are likely to be protective. Subsequently, five compounds with little to no experimental data and no established OELs from any U.S. agency or consensus OEL-setting organizations were evaluated (i.e., "unknowns"). The unknowns were assigned to overall OEBs D or E. It was concluded that the proposed framework can be used to assign protective OEBs to compounds with little to no toxicology testing data. As additional data become available, the compound may be de-risked, and a precautionary OEB (or an OEL) can be assigned. The proposed framework provides an example of a practical methodology to evaluate data poor compounds and shows that the output of this framework is expected to be protective of worker health.

A statistical method for estimating the no-observed-adverse-event-level

Bayesian Benchmark Dose Analysis

Concept on the Use of “number Needed to Be Exposed” in Epidemiology

Application of Benchmark Dose for Occupational Epidemiology in Lead Exposure

Benchmark Dose Analysis via Nonparametric Regression Modeling

Bayesian Model-Averaged Benchmark Dose Analysis Via Reparameterized Quantal-Response Models

A statistical method for assessing a threshold in epidemiological studies

A Bayesian Quasi-Likelihood Design for Identifying the Minimum Effective Dose and Maximum Utility Dose in Dose-Ranging Studies

Benchmark dose (BMD) modeling: current practice, issues, and challenges

Semi-parametric Benchmark Dose Analysis with Monotone Additive Models

Benchmark dose modeling for epidemiological dose–response assessment using case‐control studies

Reducing uncertainty in dose-response assessments by incorporating Bayesian benchmark dose modeling and in vitro data on population variability

Bayesian benchmark dose risk assessment with mixed‐factor quantal data

[Application of Benchmark Dose on Occupational Epidemiology Research in Lead Exposure].

Quantitative Risk Assessment: Developing a Bayesian Approach to Dichotomous Dose-Response Uncertainty

The estimation and translation uncertainties in applying NOAEL to clinical dose escalation

A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions

Monotonic Nonparametric Dose Response Model

Bayesian Model Averaging for Benchmark Dose Estimation

In silico occupational exposure banding framework for data poor compounds in biotechnology

Dose Selection Balancing Efficacy and Toxicity Using Bayesian Model Averaging