Abstract
Many widely used chemicals result in ubiquitous human exposure from multiple sources, including diet. Legislation mainly deals with the toxicological evaluation of single substances owing to a methodological and conceptual lack of alternatives, and does so within defined silos subject to over 40 distinct regulations in the EU alone. Furthermore, much of the research and many of the initiatives concerned with the assessment and evaluation of chemical mixtures and their potential effects on human health rely on retrospective analysis. Here we propose an approach for the prospective identification, assessment and regulation of mixtures relevant to human health. We address two distinct aspects of toxicology—which chemicals actually do occur together, and how potential mixture-related health hazards can be predicted—with an adapted concept of the exposome and large-scale hazard screens. The proactive use of the likelihood of co-exposure, together with the new approach of methods-based testing, may be a timely and feasible way of identifying those substances and mixtures where hazards may have been overlooked and regulatory action is needed. Ideally, we would generate co-exposure patterns for specific consumer groups, depending on lifestyle and dietary habits, to assess the specific risk of identified mixtures.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Wang, Z., Walker, G. W., Muir, D. C. G. & Nagatani-Yoshida, K. Toward a global understanding of chemical pollution: a first comprehensive analysis of national and regional chemical inventories. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 2575–2584 (2020).
Huang, Y. & Fang, M. Nutritional and environmental contaminant exposure: a tale of two co-existing factors for disease risks. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 14793–14796 (2020).
ICF et al. EU Insights Chemical mixtures awareness, understanding and risk perceptions. EFSA Supporting Publ. 16, EN-1602 (2019).
Drakvik, E. et al. Statement on advancing the assessment of chemical mixtures and their risks for human health and the environment. Environ. Int. 134, 105267–105274 (2020).
Considerations for Assessing the Risks of Combined Exposure to Multiple Chemicals (Environment, Health and Safety Division, Environment Directorate, OECD, 2018).
Eskola, M., Elliott, C. T., Hajslova, J., Steiner, D. & Krska, R. Towards a dietary-exposome assessment of chemicals in food: an update on the chronic health risks for the European consumer. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 60, 1890–1911 (2020).
Chu, I. et al. Mixture effects of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and polychlorinated biphenyl congeners in rats. Chemosphere 43, 807–814 (2001).
Heise, T. et al. Hepatotoxic combination effects of three azole fungicides in a broad dose range. Arch. Toxicol. 92, 859–872 (2018).
Ito, D. T., Molina, H. M., Andriolo, A. & Borges, D. R. The combination of atorvastatin and ethanol is not more hepatotoxic to rats than the administration of each drug alone. Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res. 40, 343–348 (2007).
Kortenkamp, A. Ten years of mixing cocktails: a review of combination effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Environ. Health Perspect. 115, 98–105 (2007).
Lutz, W. K., Vamvakas, S., Kopp-Schneider, A., Schlatter, J. & Stopper, H. Deviation from additivity in mixture toxicity: relevance of nonlinear dose-response relationships and cell line differences in genotoxicity assays with combinations of chemical mutagens and gamma-radiation. Environ. Health Perspect. 110, 915–918 (2002).
Schmähl, D. Combination effects in chemical carcinogenesis (experimental results). Oncology 33, 73–76 (1976).
Wormley, D. D., Ramesh, A. & Hood, D. B. Environmental contaminant-mixture effects on CNS development, plasticity, and behavior. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 197, 49–65 (2004).
Communication from the Commission to the Council—The Combination Effects of Chemicals: Chemical Mixtures COM 0252 (European Commission, 2012).
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Commitee and the Committee of the Regions—Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability COM 667 (European Commission, 2020).
Fowler, S. et al. Progress in prediction and interpretation of clinically relevant metabolic drug-drug interactions: a minireview illustrating recent developments and current opportunities. Curr. Pharmacol. Rep. 3, 36–49 (2017).
Zhang, L., Zhang, Y. D., Zhao, P. & Huang, S. M. Predicting drug-drug interactions: an FDA perspective. AAPS J. 11, 300–306 (2009).
Jia, J. et al. Mechanisms of drug combinations: interaction and network perspectives. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 8, 111–128 (2009).
Tralau, T. & Luch, A. “Drugs on oxygen”: an update and perspective on the role of cytochrome P450 testing in pharmacology. Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 8, 1357–1362 (2012).
Alarcan, J. et al. Hepatotoxicity of the pesticides imazalil, thiacloprid and clothianidin—individual and mixture effects in a 28-day study in female Wistar rats. Food Chem. Toxicol. 140, 111306 (2020).
Lasch, A., Marx-Stoelting, P., Braeuning, A. & Lichtenstein, D. More than additive effects on liver triglyceride accumulation by combinations of steatotic and non-steatotic pesticides in HepaRG cells. Arch. Toxicol. 95, 1397–1411 (2021).
Boobis, A. et al. Critical analysis of literature on low-dose synergy for use in screening chemical mixtures for risk assessment. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 41, 369–383 (2011).
Hartung, T. in Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change (ed. Herrmann, K.) 673–687 (Brill, 2019).
Paparella, M., Colacci, A. & Jacobs, M. N. Uncertainties of testing methods: what do we (want to) know about carcinogenicity? Alt. Animal Experiment. 34, 235–252 (2017).
EFSA Scientific Committee et al. Guidance on harmonised methodologies for human health, animal health and ecological risk assessment of combined exposure to multiple chemicals. EFSA J. 17, e05634 (2019).
Toxicity and Assessment of Chemical Mixtures (SCHER, SCCS & SCENIHR, 2012).
Springer, A., Herrmann, H., Sittner, D., Herbst, U. & Schulte, A. REACH Compliance: Data Availability of REACH Registration. Part 1: Screening of Chemicals >1000 tpa (Umweltbundesamt (German Environment Agency), 2015).
Schwedler, G. et al. Phthalate metabolites in urine of children and adolescents in Germany. Human biomonitoring results of the German Environmental Survey GerES V, 2014-2017. Int. J. Hygiene Environ. Health 225, 113444 (2020).
Howdeshell, K. L. et al. Dose addition models based on biologically relevant reductions in fetal testosterone accurately predict postnatal reproductive tract alterations by a phthalate mixture in rats. Toxicol. Sci. 148, 488–502 (2015).
Fox, M. A., Brewer, L. E. & Martin, L. An overview of literature topics related to current concepts, methods, tools, and applications for cumulative risk assessment (2007-2016). Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14, 389 (2017).
McCarty, L. S. & Borgert, C. J. Review of the toxicity of chemical mixtures: theory, policy, and regulatory practice. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 45, 119–143 (2006).
Moretto, A. et al. A framework for cumulative risk assessment in the 21st century. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 47, 85–97 (2017).
Kortenkamp, A. Low dose mixture effects of endocrine disrupters and their implications for regulatory thresholds in chemical risk assessment. Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 19, 105–111 (2014).
Dennis, K. K. et al. The importance of the biological impact of exposure to the concept of the exposome. Environ. Health Perspect. 124, 1504–1510 (2016).
Cobbina, S. J. et al. Toxicity assessment due to sub-chronic exposure to individual and mixtures of four toxic heavy metals. J. Hazard. Mater. 294, 109–120 (2015).
Adler-Flindt, S. & Martin, S. Comparative cytotoxicity of plant protection products and their active ingredients. Toxicol. In Vitro 54, 354–366 (2019).
Rizzati, V., Briand, O., Guillou, H. & Gamet-Payrastre, L. Effects of pesticide mixtures in human and animal models: an update of the recent literature. Chem. Biol. Interact. 254, 231–246 (2016).
Xiong, S. & Huang, C. Synergistic strategies of predominant toxins in snake venoms. Toxicol. Lett. 287, 142–154 (2018).
Cedergreen, N. Quantifying synergy: a systematic review of mixture toxicity studies within environmental toxicology. PLoS ONE 9, e96580 (2014).
Van Broekhuizen, F., Posthuma, L. & Traas, T. Addressing Combined Effects of Chemicals in Environmental Safety Assessment Under REACH-A Thought Starter RIVM letter report 2016-0162 (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, 2017).
Bopp, S. K. et al. Current EU research activities on combined exposure to multiple chemicals. Environ. Int. 120, 544–562 (2018).
Krewski, D. et al. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health B 13, 51–138 (2010).
Judson, R. S. et al. In vitro screening of environmental chemicals for targeted testing prioritization: the ToxCast project. Environ. Health Perspect. 118, 485–492 (2010).
Tralau, T. et al. Regulatory toxicology in the twenty-first century: challenges, perspectives and possible solutions. Arch. Toxicol. 89, 823–850 (2015).
Karmaus, A. L., Filer, D. L., Martin, M. T. & Houck, K. A. Evaluation of food-relevant chemicals in the ToxCast high-throughput screening program. Food Chem. Toxicol. 92, 188–196 (2016).
Browne, P., Noyes, P. D., Casey, W. M. & Dix, D. J. Application of adverse outcome pathways to U.S. EPA’s endocrine disruptor screening program. Environ. Health Perspect. 125, 096001 (2017).
Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program: Use of High Throughput Assays and Computational Tools (US EPA, 2015).
Escher, B. I. & Neale, P. A. Effect-based trigger values for mixtures of chemicals in surface water detected with in vitro bioassays. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 40, 487–499 (2021).
Vinggaard, A. M. et al. Receptor-based in vitro activities to assess human exposure to chemical mixtures and related health impacts. Environ. Int. 146, 106191 (2021).
DeBord, D. G. et al. Use of the “exposome” in the practice of epidemiology: a primer on -omic technologies. Am. J. Epidemiol. 184, 302–314 (2016).
Eskola, M., Elliott, C. T., Hajslova, J., Steiner, D. & Krska, R. Towards a dietary-exposome assessment of chemicals in food: an update on the chronic health risks for the European consumer. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 60, 1890–1911 (2020).
Vermeulen, R., Schymanski, E. L., Barabasi, A. L. & Miller, G. W. The exposome and health: where chemistry meets biology. Science 367, 392–396 (2020).
Xue, J., Lai, Y., Liu, C. W. & Ru, H. Towards mass spectrometry-based chemical exposome: current approaches, challenges, and future directions. Toxics 7, 41 (2019).
Dennis, K. K. et al. Biomonitoring in the era of the exposome. Environ. Health Perspect. 125, 502–510 (2017).
The BfR MEAL Study http://www.bfr-meal-studie.de/en/meal-homepage.html (Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, 2021).
Sobus, J. R. et al. Integrating tools for non-targeted analysis research and chemical safety evaluations at the US EPA. J. Exposure Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 28, 411–426 (2018).
Sobus, J. R. et al. Using prepared mixtures of ToxCast chemicals to evaluate non-targeted analysis (NTA) method performance. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 411, 835–851 (2019).
Ulrich, E. M. et al. EPA’s non-targeted analysis collaborative trial (ENTACT): genesis, design, and initial findings. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 411, 853–866 (2019).
Bloch, R. et al. Non-targeted mercapturic acid screening in urine using LC-MS/MS with matrix effect compensation by postcolumn infusion of internal standard (PCI-IS). Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 411, 7771–7781 (2019).
Dixon, H. M. et al. Discovery of common chemical exposures across three continents using silicone wristbands. R. Soc. Open Sci. 6, 181836–181836 (2019).
Bopp, S. K. et al. Regulatory assessment and risk management of chemical mixtures: challenges and ways forward. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2019.1579169 (2019).
Kyhl, H. B. et al. The Odense Child Cohort: aims, design, and cohort profile. Paediatr. Perinat. Epidemiol. 29, 250–258 (2015).
Mishra, S., Stierman, B., Gahche, J. J. & Potischman, N. Dietary Supplement Use Among Adults: United States, 2017–2018 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2021).
Smirnova, L., Harris, G., Leist, M. & Hartung, T. Cellular resilience. Alt. Animal Experiment. 32, 247–260 (2015).
Seeger, B. et al. Assessment of mixture toxicity of (tri)azoles and their hepatotoxic effects in vitro by means of omics technologies. Arch. Toxicol. 93, 2321–2333 (2019).
Bulusu, K. C. et al. Modelling of compound combination effects and applications to efficacy and toxicity: state-of-the-art, challenges and perspectives. Drug Discov. Today 21, 225–238 (2016).
Cheng, F., Kovacs, I. A. & Barabasi, A. L. Network-based prediction of drug combinations. Nat. Commun. 10, 1197 (2019).
German National Cohort (GNC) Consortium. The German National Cohort: aims, study design and organization. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 29, 371–382 (2014).
Evans, R. M., Martin, O. V., Faust, M. & Kortenkamp, A. Should the scope of human mixture risk assessment span legislative/regulatory silos for chemicals? Sci. Total Environ. 543, 757–764 (2016).
Hernández, A. F. & Tsatsakis, A. M. Human exposure to chemical mixtures: challenges for the integration of toxicology with epidemiology data in risk assessment. Food Chem. Toxicol. 103, 188–193 (2017).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
J.K., M.O. and T.T. initially developed and drafted the concept. All authors contributed equally to the further conceptualization, writing and editing of the manuscript. All figures were generated by J.K.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Peer review information Nature Food thanks Thomas Hartung, Ivonne Rietjens and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Fig. 1 and Table 1.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tralau, T., Oelgeschläger, M., Kugler, J. et al. A prospective whole-mixture approach to assess risk of the food and chemical exposome. Nat Food 2, 463–468 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00316-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00316-7
This article is cited by
-
Food risk assessment in the farm-to-table continuum: report from the conference on good hygiene practices to ensure food safety
Agriculture & Food Security (2024)
-
Thresholds of adversity for endocrine disrupting substances: a conceptual case study
Archives of Toxicology (2024)
-
Computational approaches to predict the toxicity of bioactive natural products: a mini review of methodologies
Food Science and Biotechnology (2024)
-
The adverse outcome pathway for breast cancer: a knowledge management framework bridging biomedicine and toxicology
Discover Oncology (2023)
-
Basic concepts of mixture toxicity and relevance for risk evaluation and regulation
Archives of Toxicology (2023)