A retrospective analysis of toxicity studies in dogs and impact on the chronic reference dose for conventional pesticide chemicals

Abstract

Prior to October 2007, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) required both 13-week and 1-year studies in Beagle dogs be submitted in support of registration for pesticides. Following an extensive retrospective analysis, we (the authors) determined that the 1-year toxicity dog study should be eliminated as a requirement for pesticide registration. The present work presents this retrospective analysis of results from 13-week and 1-year dog studies for 110 conventional pesticide chemicals, representing more than 50 classes of pesticides. The data were evaluated to determine if the 13-week dog study, in addition to the long-term studies in two rodent species (mice and rats), were sufficient for the identification of no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) and lowest observed adverse effect levels (LOAELs) for the derivation of chronic reference doses (RfD). Only pesticides with adequate 13-week and 1-year duration studies were included in the present evaluation. Toxicity endpoints and dose-response data from 13-week and 1-year studies were compared. The analysis showed that 70 of the 110 pesticides had similar critical effects regardless of duration and had NOAELs and LOAELs within a difference of 1.5-fold of each other. For the remaining 40 pesticides, 31 had lower NOAELs and LOAELs in the 1-year study, primarily due to dose selection and spacing. In only 2% of the cases were additional toxic effects identified in the 1-year study that were not observed in the 13-week study and/or in the rodent studies. In 8% of the cases, the 1-year dog had a lower NOAEL and/or LOAEL than the 13-week study, but there would have been no regulatory impact if the 1-year dog study had not been performed because adequate data were available from the other required studies. A dog toxicity study beyond 13-weeks does not have significant impact on the derivation of a chronic RfD for pesticide risk assessment.