Progress in developing new tools, assays, and approaches to assess human hazard and health risk provides an opportunity to re-evaluate the necessity of dog studies for the safety evaluation of agrochemicals. A workshop was held where participants discussed the strengths and limitations of past use of dogs for pesticide evaluations and registrations. Opportunities were identified to support alternative approaches to answer human safety questions without performing the required 90-day dog study. Development of a decision tree for determining when the dog study might not be necessary to inform pesticide safety and risk assessment was proposed. Such a process will require global regulatory authority participation to lead to its acceptance. The identification of unique effects in dogs that are not identified in rodents will need further evaluation and determination of their relevance to humans. The establishment of in vitro and in silico approaches that can provide critical data on relative species sensitivity and human relevance will be an important tool to advance the decision process. Promising novel tools including in vitro comparative metabolism studies, in silico models, and high-throughput assays able to identify metabolites and mechanisms of action leading to development of adverse outcome pathways will need further development. To replace or eliminate the 90-day dog study, a collaborative, multidisciplinary, international effort that transcends organizations and regulatory agencies will be needed in order to develop guidance on when the study would not be necessary for human safety and risk assessment.
Keywords: dog toxicity testing; human safety 3Rs; new approach methods; pesticides; risk assessment.