(BMD) modeling of in vivo developmental toxicity data
is considered to be the best indicator to be used as the POD to derive OELs.
Finally, we deployed the workflow in two online tools: a standalone web app titled APROBAweb at https://wchiu.shinyapps.io/APROBAweb/ (Chiu 2018a) and an implementation that could be integrated with Bayesian benchmark dose
modeling at https://benchmarkdose.org (Shao and Shapiro 2018).
Based on allometric Extrapolation 1986; Freireich et Scaling (BW2/3 or al., 1966; Mordenti BW3/4); equivalent and Chappell, 1989); to EMA F1 FDA (2005) LOAEL-to-NOAEL Weil, 1972; Lewis, Not required if 1993; Abdel-Rahman Benchmark Dose
is 1995 used; equivalent to EMA F5 (also includes severity) Exposure Duration Weil and Duration of critical McCollister, 1963; effect study is less McNamara, 1976, than actual exposure Lewis et al., 1990; scenario; equivalent Lewis and Nessel, to EMA F3 1994; Kadry et al, 1995 Database Dourson et al.
Health effects of cadmium exposure in the general environment in Japan with special reference to the lower limit of the benchmark dose
as the threshold level of urinary cadmium.
calculations of methylmercury-associated neurobehavioral deficits.
In 1994, the US EPA developed a range of possible RfC values of 0.09--0.2 [micro]g/[m.sup.3] using benchmark doses
developed from the Roels et al (34) cohort (116).
Even though one study found no adverse health effects from maternal mercury exposure to fetuses, the NRC focused on another study that did find an effect in order to determine the benchmark dose
at 85 parts per billion.
Note: BMDL, benchmark dose
lower confidence limit; HTS [OED.sub.05], high-throughput screening-based oral equivalent dose lower 5% confidence limit; NOAEL, no observed adverse effect level; RfD, reference dose.
The same concern is often raised regarding the benchmark dose
(BMD) method (Crump, 1984), which requires setting of a benchmark risk (BMR) in order to estimate the lower confidence limit of the benchmark dose
(BMDL) (Crump, 1995).
approach) by qualified toxicologists.
Methodological differences related to the use of benchmark dose
rather than the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL), the study of small-sized populations or analytical aspects such an insufficient adjustment for variations in diuresis, might account for part of the variation in these estimates.