An impact analysis of the application of the threshold of toxicological concern concept to pharmaceuticals.

The recent application of the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) concept to the regulation of pharmaceuticals in the European Union is analyzed. The derivation of TTC and the threshold of regulation that followed it were originally intended to provide makers of food contact materials greater flexibility with their products, while allowing the CFSAN branch of FDA to conserve its resources for more important issues. A reanalysis of the scientific data employed by EMEA regulators to rationalize its 1.5 mcg default genotoxic impurity limit is presented to demonstrate (a) that direct translation of conclusions relevant to food consumption are unduly influenced by many classes of potent carcinogens of historic concern which would be impossible to generate unknowingly as pharmaceutical impurities, and (b) that the majority of reactive chemicals that would be useful to synthetic chemists are among the least potent carcinogens in the underpinning supportive analyses. Evidence is further presented to show that implementation and acceptance of a 1.5 mcg TTC-based total limit on such impurities can be expected to impede pharmaceutical research and development efficiency while providing an insignificant cancer risk-avoidance benefit to patients who require pharmaceutical treatments. The conclusion drawn is that a significantly higher default limit can readily be defended that would be both in keeping with TTC principles and the best interest of patients.

[1]  Lutz Müller,et al.  A rationale for determining, testing, and controlling specific impurities in pharmaceuticals that possess potential for genotoxicity. , 2006, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[2]  Amy Berrington de González,et al.  Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries , 2004, The Lancet.

[3]  E Kennepohl,et al.  A procedure for the safety evaluation of flavouring substances. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. , 1999, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[4]  Melvin E Andersen,et al.  Dose-dependent transitions in mechanisms of toxicity. , 2004, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[5]  A. Bailey,et al.  A tiered approach to threshold of regulation. , 1999, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[6]  B. Ames,et al.  Nature's chemicals and synthetic chemicals: comparative toxicology. , 1990, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  W. Viscusi Fatal Tradeoffs: Public and Private Responsibilities for Risk , 1992 .

[8]  S. Bingham Carcinogens and Anticarcinogens in the Human Diet: a Comparison of Naturally Occurring and Synthetic Substances , 1997, British Journal of Cancer.

[9]  Ian C. Munro Rapporteur Safety assessment procedures for indirect food additives: An overview: Report of a workshop , 1990 .

[10]  B. Ames,et al.  Dietary pesticides (99.99% all natural). , 1990, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  K S Crump,et al.  Correlation between carcinogenic potency of chemicals in animals and humans. , 1988, Risk Analysis.

[12]  Charles W. Felix Food Protection Technology , 1987 .

[13]  Robert Kroes,et al.  Threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) in food safety assessment. , 2002, Toxicology letters.

[14]  I C Munro,et al.  Safety assessment procedures for indirect food additives: an overview. Report of a workshop. , 1990, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[15]  Thresholds of carcinogenicity in the ED01 study. , 2003, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[16]  岩崎 民子 SOURCES AND EFFECTS OF IONIZING RADIATION : United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes , 2002 .

[17]  R A Ford,et al.  Correlation of structural class with no-observed-effect levels: a proposal for establishing a threshold of concern. , 1996, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[18]  R. Tennant,et al.  Classification according to chemical structure, mutagenicity to Salmonella and level of carcinogenicity of a further 39 chemicals tested for carcinogenicity by the U.S. National Toxicology Program. , 1991, Mutation research.

[19]  M. Pike,et al.  A carcinogenic potency database of the standardized results of animal bioassays , 1984, Environmental health perspectives.

[20]  G Goodman,et al.  Predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals in humans from rodent bioassay data. , 1991, Environmental health perspectives.

[21]  J. S. Carey,et al.  Analysis of the reactions used for the preparation of drug candidate molecules. , 2006, Organic & biomolecular chemistry.

[22]  Division on Earth Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2 , 2006 .

[23]  D. Ripin,et al.  Survey of GMP Bulk Reactions Run in a Research Facility between 1985 and 2002 , 2005 .

[24]  R. Doll,et al.  Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  Melvin E Andersen,et al.  Dose-dependent transitions in mechanisms of toxicity: case studies. , 2004, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[26]  S. Fukushima,et al.  Concordance of thresholds for carcinogenicity of N-nitrosodiethylamine , 2006, Archives of Toxicology.

[27]  B. Ames,et al.  Chemical carcinogenesis: too many rodent carcinogens. , 1990, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  A G Renwick,et al.  Structure-based thresholds of toxicological concern--guidance for application to substances present at low levels in the diet. , 2005, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.