A weight of evidence approach for hazard screening of engineered nanomaterials

Abstract

Hazard identification is an important step in assessing nanomaterial risk and is required under multiple regulatory frameworks in the US, Europe and worldwide. Given the emerging nature of the field and complexity of nanomaterials, multiple studies on even basic material properties often result in varying data pointing in different directions when data interpretation is attempted. Weight of evidence (WOE) evaluation has been recommended for nanomaterial risk assessment, but the majority of WOE frameworks are qualitative in nature and do not satisfy the growing needs for objectivity and transparency that are necessary for regulatory decision making. This paper implements a quantitative WOE framework that utilizes multi-criteria decision analysis methodology for integrating individual studies on nanomaterial hazard resulting from physico-chemical and toxicological properties of nanomaterials. For the first time, a WOE approach explicitly integrates expert evaluation of data quality of available information. Application of the framework is illustrated for titanium dioxide nanoparticles (nano-TiO₂), but the approach is designed to compare the relative hazard of several nanomaterials as well as emerging stressors in general.

Keywords::

• engineered nanomaterials
• titanium dioxide nanoparticles
• human health hazard screening
• weight of evidence
• multi-criteria decision analysis

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Professor Jeffery Keisler and Mr. Matthew Bates for helpful discussions. This study was funded in part by the US Army Engineer Research and Development Center Nanotechnology Focus Area and EU FP7 ENPRA Project (NMP4-SL-2009–228789). Permission was granted by the Chief of Engineers to publish this information. The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the individual authors and not those of the US Army or other sponsor agencies.