BIBLIOGRAPHY
7Note: All websites were accessed in February and March 2017.
Ankley GT, Bennett RS, Erickson RJ, Hoff DJ, Hornung MW, Johnson RD, Mount DR, Nichols JW, Russom CL, Schmieder PK, Serrrano JA, Tietge JE, Villeneuve DL. 2010. Adverse outcome pathways: A conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment. Envi Toxicol Chem 29:730–741.
Bars R, Broeckaert F, Fegert I, Gross M, Hallmark N, Kedwards T, Lewis D, O'Hagan S, Panter GH, Weltje L, Weyers A, Wheeler JR, Galay-Burgos M. 2011. Science based guidance for the assessment of endocrine disrupting properties of chemicals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 59:37-46. Erratum in: Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 60:411-2.
Bars R, Fegert I, Gross M, Lewis D, Weltje L, Weyers A, Wheeler JR, Galay-Burgos M. 2012. Risk assessment of endocrine active chemicals: identifying chemicals of regulatory concern. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 64:143-54.
Boobis AR, Daston GP, Preston RJ, Olin SS. 2009. Application of key events analysis to chemical carcinogens and noncarcinogens. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 49:690-707.
Boobis AR, Cohen SM, Dellarco VL, Doe JE, Fenner-Crisp PA, Moretto A, Pastoor TP, Schoeny RS, Seed JG, Wolf DC. 2016. Classification schemes for carcinogenicity based on hazard-identification have become outmoded and serve neither science nor society. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 82:158-166.
Boobis AR, Cohen SM, Dellarco VL, Doe JE, Fenner-Crisp PA, Moretto A, Pastoor TP, Schoeny RS, Seed JG, Wolf DC. 2017. Response to Loomis et al Comment on Boobis et al. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 16 Feb 2017 [epub ahead of print] pii: S0273-2300(17)30032-6.
Borgert CJ, Mihaich EM, Ortego LS, Bentley KS, Holmes CM, Levine SL, Becker RA. 2011. Hypothesis-driven weight of evidence framework for evaluating data within the US EPA's Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 61:185-91.
Borgert CJ, Stuchal LD, Mihaich EM, Becker RA, Bentley KS, Brausch JM, Coady K, Geter DR, Gordon E, Guiney PD, Hess F, Holmes CM, LeBaron MJ, Levine S, Marty S, Mukhi S, Neal BH, Ortego LS, Saltmiras DA, Snajdr S, Staveley J, Tobia A. 2014. Relevance weighting of tier 1 endocrine screening endpoints by rank order. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 101:90-113.
Coady KK, Biever RC, Denslow ND, Gross M, Guiney PD, Holbech H, Karouna-Renier NK, Katsiadaki I, Krueger H, Levine SL, Maack G, Williams M, Wolf JC, Ankley GT. 2017. Current limitations and recommendations to improve testing for the environmental assessment of endocrine active substances. Integr Environ Assess Manag 13:302-316.
Commission. 2016. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on endocrine disruptors and the draft Commission acts setting out scientific criteria for their determination in the context of the EU legislation on plant protection products and biocidal products (SWD(2016) 211 final and SWD (2016) 212 final). COM(2016) 350 final, Brussels, 15.06.2016.
Corton JC, Cunningham ML, Hummer BT, Lau C, Meek B, Peters JM, Popp JA, Rhomberg L, Seed J, Klaunig JE. 2014. Mode of action framework analysis for receptor-mediated toxicity: The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARa) as a case study; Crit Rev Toxicol 44(1): 1–49.
Creton S, Saghir SA, Bartels MJ, Billington R, Bus JS, Davies W, Dent MP, Hawksworth GM, Parry S, Travis KZ. 2012. Use of toxicokinetics to support chemical evaluation: Informing high dose selection and study interpretation. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 62:241-7.
deFur PL. 2004. Use and role of invertebrate models in endocrine disruptor research and testing. ILAR J 45:484-493.
deFur PL, Crane, M, Ingersoll, C, Tattersfield, L (eds.). 1999. Endocrine disruption in invertebrates: Endocrinology, testing and assessment. Pensacola FL: SETAC Press.
de Peyster A, Mihaich E. 2014. Hypothesis-driven weight of evidence analysis to determine potential endocrine activity of MTBE. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 69:348-70.
Dekant W, Bridges J. 2016a. Assessment of reproductive and developmental effects of DINP, DnHP and DCHP using quantitative weight of evidence. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 81:397-406.
Dekant W, Bridges J. 2016b. A quantitative weight of evidence methodology for the assessment of reproductive and developmental toxicity and its application for classification and labeling of chemicals. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 82:173-185.
ECETOC. 2009a. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals. Technical Report No. 106. Guidance on identifying endocrine disrupting effects. Brussels, June 2009.
ECETOC. 2009b. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals. Workshop Report No. 16 and addendum. Guidance on interpreting endocrine disrupting effects. 29-30 June 2009, Barcelona.
ECETOC. 2011. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals. Workshop Report No. 21. Risk assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals. 9-10 May 2011, Florence.
ECETOC. 2016. European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals. Technical Report No. 128. Guidance on assessment and application of adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) relevant to the endocrine system.. December 2016.
ECHA and EFSA. 2016. European Chemicals Agency and European Food Authority. Draft ECHA and EFSA Guidance Document for the implementation of the hazard-based criteria to identify endocrine disruptors. Published 20.12.2016; available at:
https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/161220_ed_guidance_outline.pdf
EFSA. 2011. Submission of scientific peer-reviewed open literature for the approval of pesticide active substances under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. EFSA Journal 9:2092; available at:
https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2092
EFSA. 2013. Scientific Opinion on the hazard assessment of endocrine disruptors: Scientific criteria for identification of endocrine disruptors and appropriateness of existing test methods for assessing effects mediated by these substances on human health and the environment. EFSA Journal 11:3132.
EP and Council of the EU. 2009. Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. OJ L 309, 1–50, 24.11.2009.
EP and Council of the EU. 2012. Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products. OJ L 167/1, 27.06.2012.
Fenner-Crisp PA, Dellarco VL. 2016. Key Elements for judging the quality of a risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 124.
Krewski D, Westphal M, Al-Zoughool M, Croteau MC, Andersen ME. 2011. New directions in toxicity testing. Annu Rev Public Health 32:161–78.
Lewis RW, Billington R, Debryune E, Gamer A, Lang B, Carpanini F. 2002. Recognition of adverse and nonadverse effects in toxicity studies. Toxicol Pathol 30: 66 -74
Lewis RW. 2013. Risk assessment of 'endocrine substances': guidance on identifying endocrine disruptors. Toxicol Lett 223:287-90.
Meek ME, Boobis A, Cote I, Dellarco V, Fotakis G, Munn S, Seed J, Vickers C. 2014a. New developments in the evolution and application of the WHO/IPCS framework on mode of action/species concordance analysis. J Appl Toxicol 34:1-18.
Meek ME, Palermo CM, Bachman AN, North CM, Jeffrey Lewis R. 2014b. Mode of action human relevance (species concordance) framework: Evolution of the Bradford Hill considerations and comparative analysis of weight of evidence. J Appl Toxicol 34:595-606.
Mihaich EM, Schäfers C, Dreier DA, Hecker M, Ortego L, Kawashima Y, Dang ZC, Solomon K. 2017. Challenges in assigning endocrine-specific modes of action: Recommendations for researchers and regulators. Integr Environ Assess Manag 13:280-292.
Moermond C, Beasly A, Breton R, Junghans M, Laskowski R, Solomon K, Zahner H. 2016a. Assessing the reliability of ecotoxicological studies: An overview of current needs and approaches. IEAM 13 (9999):1-2.
Moermond CT, Kase R, Korkaric M, Ågerstrand M. 2016b. CRED: Criteria for reporting and evaluating ecotoxicity data. Environ Toxicol Chem 35:1297-309.
Munn S, Goumenou M. 2013: Report of the Endocrine Disrupters Expert Advisory Group. Key scientific issues relevant to the identification and characterisation of endocrine disrupting substances. JRC Scientific and Policy Reports. EUR 25919 EN, 34 pages.
OECD. 2012a. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Conceptual Framework for testing and assessment of endocrine disruptors (as revised in 2012); available at:
OECD. 2012b. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Series on testing and assessment No. 150. Guidance document on standardised test guidelines for evaluating chemicals for endocrine disruption. ENV/JM/MONO(2012)22. Paris, France, 24.08.2012 (cancels and replaces same document of 26.07.2012).
OECD. 2012c. Appendix A. Collection of working definitions; available at:
http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/49963576.pdf
OECD. 2012d. Proposal for a template, and guidance on developing and assessing the completeness of adverse outcome pathways; available at: http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/49963554.pdf
OECD. 2013. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Series on Testing and Assessment No. 184. Guidance document on developing and assessing adverse outcome pathways. ENV/JM/MONO(2013)6, Paris, France, 17.04.2013.
OECD. 2016. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Workplan for the Test Guidelines Programme (TGP); available at:
https://www.oecd.org/env/ehs/testing/TGP%20workplan_July%202016-for%20publication.pdf
Rhomberg LR, Goodman JE, Bailey LA, Prueitt RL, Beck NB, Bevan C, Honeycutt M, Kaminski NE, Paoli G, Pottenger LH, Scherer RW, Wise KC, Becker RA. 2013. A survey of frameworks for best practices in weight-of-evidence analyses. Crit Rev Toxicol 43:753-84.
Roberts M, Leopold A (on behalf of the Steering Committee). 2016. Summary of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) Pellston Workshop® on Endocrine-Active Substances. SETAC Globe 17(4), 14.04.2016; available at: http://globe.setac.org/2016/april/ehra-pellston-workshop.html
Rudén C, Adams J, Ågerstrand M, Brock TC, Poulsen V, Schlekat CE, Wheeler JR, Henry TR. 2016. Assessing the relevance of ecotoxicological studies for regulatory decision making. Integr Environ Assess Manag [epub ahead of print] 07.09.2016, doi: 10.1002/ieam.1846.
Rybacka A, Rudén C, Tetko IV, Andersson PL. 2015. Identifying potential endocrine disruptors among industrial chemicals and their metabolites--development and evaluation of in silico tools. Chemosphere 139:372-8.
Sonich-Mullin C, Fielder R, Wiltse J, Baetcke K, Dempsey J, Fenner-Crisp P, Grant D, Hartley M, Knaap A, Kroese D, Mangelsdorf I, Meek E, Rice JM, Younes M; International Programme on Chemical Safety. 2001. IPCS conceptual framework for evaluating a mode of action for chemical carcinogenesis. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 34:146-52.
Uman LS. 2011. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 20:1.
Villeneuve DL, Garcia-Reyero N. 2011. A vision and strategy for predictive ecotoxicology testing in the 21st century. Environ Toxicol Chem 30:1–8.
Weltje L, Wheeler JR, Weyers A, Galay-Burgos M. 2013. Refinement of the ECETOC approach to identify endocrine disrupting properties of chemicals in ecotoxicology. Toxicol Lett 223:291-4.
Wetmore BA, Wambaugh JF, Ferguson SS, Sochaski MA, Rotroff DM, Freeman K, Clewell HJ 3rd, Dix DJ, Andersen ME, Houck KA, Allen B, Judson RS, Singh R, Kavlock RJ, Richard AM, Thomas RS. 2012. Integration of dosimetry, exposure, and high-throughput screening data in chemical toxicity assessment. Toxicol Sci 125(1):157-74.
Wheeler JR, Panter GH, Weltje L, Thorpe KL. 2013. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.; United States Environmental Protection Agency. Test concentration setting for fish in vivo endocrine screening assays. Chemosphere 92(9):1067-76.
Wheeler JR, Weltje L, Green RM. 2014. Mind the gap: Concerns using endpoints from endocrine screening assays in risk assessment. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 69(3):289-95.
Wheeler J, Coady K. 2016. Are all chemicals endocrine disruptors? Integr Environ Assess Manag 12:402-3.
WHO/IPCS. 2002. International Programme on Chemical Safety. Global assessment of the state-of-the-science of endocrine disruptors. World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland; available at:
http://www.who.int/ipcs/publications/new_issues/endocrine_disruptors/en/
WHO/IPCS. 2009. International Program on Chemical Safety, Principles and methods for the risk assessment of chemicals in food. (Environmental Health Criteria), World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland.