Risk‐based approach in the revised European Union drinking water legislation: Opportunities for bioanalytical tools

A plethora of in vitro bioassays are developed in the context of chemical risk assessment and clinical diagnostics to test effects on different biological processes. Such assays can also be implemented in effect‐based monitoring (EBM) of (drinking) water quality alongside chemical analyses. Effects‐based monitoring can provide insight into risks for the environment and human health associated with exposure to (unknown) complex, low‐level mixtures of micropollutants, which fits in the risk‐based approach that was recently introduced in the European Drinking Water Directive. Some challenges remain, in particular those related to selection and interpretation of bioassays. For water quality assessment, carcinogenesis, adverse effects on reproduction and development, effects on xenobiotic metabolism, modulation of hormone systems, DNA reactivity, and adaptive stress responses are considered the most relevant toxicological endpoints. An evaluation procedure of the applicability and performance of in vitro bioassays for water quality monitoring, based on existing information, has been developed, which can be expanded with guidelines for experimental evaluations. In addition, a methodology for the interpretation of in vitro monitoring data is required, because the sensitivity of specific in vitro bioassays in combination with sample concentration may lead to responses of chemicals (far) below exposure concentrations that are relevant for human health effects. Different approaches are proposed to derive effect‐based trigger values (EBTs), including EBTs based on (1) relative ecotoxicity potency, (2) health‐based threshold values for chronic exposure in humans and kinetics of reference chemicals, and (3) read‐across from (drinking) water guideline values. Effects‐based trigger values need to be chosen carefully in order to be sufficiently but not overly conservative to indicate potential health effects. Consensus on the crucial steps in the selection and interpretation of in vitro bioassay data will facilitate implementation and legal embedding in the context of water quality monitoring of such assays in EBM strategies. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;15:126–134. © 2018 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC)

[1]  Rolf Altenburger,et al.  Benchmarking organic micropollutants in wastewater, recycled water and drinking water with in vitro bioassays. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[2]  M. Greenberg,et al.  Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century , 2009, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[3]  A. Kortenkamp,et al.  Something from "nothing"--eight weak estrogenic chemicals combined at concentrations below NOECs produce significant mixture effects. , 2002, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  C. de Jager,et al.  Estrogenic activity, chemical levels and health risk assessment of municipal distribution point water from Pretoria and Cape Town, South Africa. , 2017, Chemosphere.

[5]  Shane A. Snyder,et al.  Bioanalytical tools: half a century of application for potable reuse , 2015 .

[6]  F. Leusch,et al.  Analysis of the sensitivity of in vitro bioassays for androgenic, progestagenic, glucocorticoid, thyroid and estrogenic activity: Suitability for drinking and environmental waters. , 2017, Environment international.

[7]  Helmut Segner,et al.  The SOLUTIONS project: challenges and responses for present and future emerging pollutants in land and water resources management. , 2015, The Science of the total environment.

[8]  Timo Hamers,et al.  Bioassay battery interlaboratory investigation of emerging contaminants in spiked water extracts - Towards the implementation of bioanalytical monitoring tools in water quality assessment and monitoring. , 2016, Water research.

[9]  K. Baken,et al.  Toxicological risk assessment and prioritization of drinking water relevant contaminants of emerging concern. , 2018, Environment international.

[10]  Lisa Truong,et al.  A New Statistical Approach to Characterize Chemical-Elicited Behavioral Effects in High-Throughput Studies Using Zebrafish , 2017, PloS one.

[11]  E. Simon,et al.  Effect-based tools for monitoring estrogenic mixtures: Evaluation of five in vitro bioassays. , 2017, Water research.

[12]  Daniel Schlenk,et al.  A tiered, integrated biological and chemical monitoring framework for contaminants of emerging concern in aquatic ecosystems , 2016, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[13]  Annemarie P van Wezel,et al.  Trigger values for investigation of hormonal activity in drinking water and its sources using CALUX bioassays. , 2013, Environment international.

[14]  Antony J. Williams,et al.  ToxCast Chemical Landscape: Paving the Road to 21st Century Toxicology. , 2016, Chemical research in toxicology.

[15]  C. Prasse,et al.  Spoilt for choice: A critical review on the chemical and biological assessment of current wastewater treatment technologies. , 2015, Water research.

[16]  Barbora Jarošová,et al.  What level of estrogenic activity determined by in vitro assays in municipal waste waters can be considered as safe? , 2014, Environment international.

[17]  Timothy E H Allen,et al.  Defining molecular initiating events in the adverse outcome pathway framework for risk assessment. , 2014, Chemical research in toxicology.

[18]  Daniel Schlenk,et al.  Interlaboratory comparison of in vitro bioassays for screening of endocrine active chemicals in recycled water. , 2015, Water research.

[19]  J. Keller,et al.  Monitoring the biological activity of micropollutants during advanced wastewater treatment with ozonation and activated carbon filtration. , 2010, Water research.

[20]  Emma L. Schymanski,et al.  Nontarget Screening with High Resolution Mass Spectrometry in the Environment: Ready to Go? , 2017, Environmental science & technology.

[21]  Bart Van der Burg,et al.  Detection of multiple hormonal activities in wastewater effluents and surface water, using a panel of steroid receptor CALUX bioassays. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  Melvin E. Andersen,et al.  Incorporating High-Throughput Exposure Predictions With Dosimetry-Adjusted In Vitro Bioactivity to Inform Chemical Toxicity Testing , 2015, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[23]  Aimin Li,et al.  Toxicological and chemical insights into representative source and drinking water in eastern China. , 2018, Environmental pollution.

[24]  Abraham Brouwer,et al.  SIMONI (Smart Integrated Monitoring) as a novel bioanalytical strategy for water quality assessment: Part II–field feasibility survey , 2017, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[25]  E. Power,et al.  International Trends in Bioassay Use for Effluent Management , 2004, Ecotoxicology.

[26]  Melvin E Andersen,et al.  Adaptive Posttranslational Control in Cellular Stress Response Pathways and Its Relationship to Toxicity Testing and Safety Assessment. , 2015, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[27]  A. Kolkman,et al.  Sample preparation for combined chemical analysis and in vitro bioassay application in water quality assessment. , 2013, Environmental toxicology and pharmacology.

[28]  Ron van der Oost,et al.  SIMONI (Smart Integrated Monitoring) as a novel bioanalytical strategy for water quality assessment: Part I–model design and effect‐based trigger values , 2017, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[29]  Vaal Ma,et al.  Microbiotests as tools for environmental monitoring , 1995 .

[30]  W. C. Cannon,et al.  An improved flow-pass nose-only exposure system , 1987 .

[31]  Timo Hamers,et al.  Effect-based trigger values for in vitro and in vivo bioassays performed on surface water extracts supporting the environmental quality standards (EQS) of the European Water Framework Directive. , 2018, The Science of the total environment.

[32]  Sharon Munn,et al.  Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) development I: strategies and principles. , 2014, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[33]  Rolf Altenburger,et al.  Most oxidative stress response in water samples comes from unknown chemicals: the need for effect-based water quality trigger values. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[34]  Annemarie P van Wezel,et al.  Towards the review of the European Union Water Framework Directive: Recommendations for more efficient assessment and management of chemical contamination in European surface water resources. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[35]  Simon Toze,et al.  Bioanalytical tools for the evaluation of organic micropollutants during sewage treatment, water recycling and drinking water generation. , 2011, Water research.

[36]  Rolf Altenburger,et al.  Micropollutants in European rivers: A mode of action survey to support the development of effect‐based tools for water monitoring , 2016, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[37]  M. V. Pablos,et al.  Use of a novel battery of bioassays for the biological characterisation of hazardous wastes. , 2009, Ecotoxicology and environmental safety.

[38]  Timo Hamers,et al.  Expert opinion on toxicity profiling—report from a NORMAN expert group meeting , 2013, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[39]  Beate I Escher,et al.  Modeling Exposure in the Tox21 in Vitro Bioassays. , 2017, Chemical research in toxicology.

[40]  L. Rosenblum,et al.  Comparison of in vitro estrogenic activity and estrogen concentrations in source and treated waters from 25 U.S. drinking water treatment plants. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[41]  Mario Carere,et al.  In vitro bioassays to screen for endocrine active pharmaceuticals in surface and waste waters. , 2015, Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis.

[42]  W. Brack,et al.  Solid-phase extraction as sample preparation of water samples for cell-based and other in vitro bioassays. , 2018, Environmental science. Processes & impacts.

[43]  Tobias Porsbring,et al.  The European technical report on aquatic effect-based monitoring tools under the water framework directive , 2015, Environmental Sciences Europe.

[44]  Selection criteria to select in vitro bioassays for implementation and use , 2015 .

[45]  Steven K. Gibb.  Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy. , 2008, Reproductive toxicology.

[46]  Bojana Zegura,et al.  Combination of in vitro bioassays for the determination of cytotoxic and genotoxic potential of wastewater, surface water and drinking water samples. , 2009, Chemosphere.

[47]  Dan J Stein,et al.  Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 333 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016 , 2017, Lancet.

[48]  A. Kolkman,et al.  Application of effect-directed analysis to identify mutagenic nitrogenous disinfection by-products of advanced oxidation drinking water treatment , 2018, Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

[49]  Daniel L Villeneuve,et al.  Adverse outcome pathways: A conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment , 2010, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[50]  M. Lamoree,et al.  Development of a luminescent mutagenicity test for high-throughput screening of aquatic samples. , 2018, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[51]  Annemarie P van Wezel,et al.  High-resolution mass spectrometric identification and quantification of glucocorticoid compounds in various wastewaters in the Netherlands. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[52]  Zachary A. Capshaw,et al.  Applying the Bradford Hill criteria in the 21st century: how data integration has changed causal inference in molecular epidemiology , 2015, Emerging Themes in Epidemiology.

[53]  K. Baken,et al.  Exploration of ToxCast/Tox21 bioassays as candidate bioanalytical tools for measuring groups of chemicals in water. , 2018, Chemosphere.

[54]  Frederic D.L. Leusch,et al.  Bioanalytical Tools in Water Quality Assessment , 2011 .

[55]  Frederic D L Leusch,et al.  Effect-based trigger values for in vitro bioassays: Reading across from existing water quality guideline values. , 2015, Water research.

[56]  Mathieu Vinken,et al.  The adverse outcome pathway concept: a pragmatic tool in toxicology. , 2013, Toxicology.

[57]  A. Kolkman,et al.  A novel sample preparation procedure for effect-directed analysis of micro-contaminants of emerging concern in surface waters. , 2018, Talanta.

[58]  Alicia Paini,et al.  In vitro to in vivo extrapolation for high throughput prioritization and decision making. , 2018, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.