Kools Stefan A E, Boxall Alistair, Moltmann Johann F, Bryning Gareth, Koschorreck Jan, Knacker Thomas
ECT Oekotoxikologie GmbH, Boettgerstrasse 2-74, D-65439 Floersheim a.M., Germany.
Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2008 Oct;4(4):399-408. doi: 10.1897/IEAM_2008-002.1.
The most likely entry pathways of veterinary pharmaceuticals to the environment are via slurry or manure from intensively reared animals to soil and via dung or urine from animals grazing on pasture. These pathways may result in contamination of surface water via runoff or leaching and drainage. Direct entry into water may occur by defecation by pasture animals or by Scompanion animals. In addition, application of medicines for aquaculture is important for a limited number of veterinary medicinal products. For a large number of veterinary medicinal products, consistent data on the environmental risk have never been generated. In this project, a simple risk-based ranking procedure was developed that should allow assessing the potential for environmental risks of active substances of veterinary medicinal products. In the European Union approximately 2000 products containing 741 active substances were identified. In the prescreening step and in agreement with the technical guidelines released by the European Medicines Agency, 294 natural substances, complex mixtures, and substances with low expected exposure were exempted from the ranking procedure. For 233 active substances, sufficient information was collated on 4 exposure scenarios: Intensively reared animals, pasture animals, companion animals, and aquaculture. The ranking approach was performed in 4 phases: (1) usage estimation; (2) characterization of exposure to soil, dung, surface water, and aquatic organisms depending on exposure scenarios; (3) characterization of effects based on therapeutical doses; and (4) risk characterization, which is the ratio of exposure to effects (risk index), and ranking. Generally, the top-ranked substances were from the antibiotic and parasiticide groups of veterinary medicines. Differences occurred in the ranking of substances in soil via application to either intensively reared or pasture animals. In intensive rearing, anticoccidia, for example, are used as feed-administered medicines (feed additives) in comparatively large doses over a long time. For pasture animals, these substances are used less, if at all, and therefore receive lower ranks. Besides that, the risk indices for the aquatic compartment are large for substances used in aquaculture or applied to companion animals. In conclusion, the ranking scheme developed for this project provided a scientifically based and pragmatic means of assessing the relative priority of veterinary medicines for further detailed risk assessment. The outcome of this project will support pharmaceutical industries and competent authorities when seeking authorization for market applications of veterinary pharmaceutical products.
兽药进入环境最可能的途径是通过集约化养殖动物产生的粪便或粪肥进入土壤,以及通过在牧场放牧动物的粪便或尿液进入环境。这些途径可能会通过径流、淋溶和排水导致地表水受到污染。牧场动物或伴侣动物排便可能会直接导致兽药进入水体。此外,对于少数兽药产品来说,水产养殖用药很重要。对于大量兽药产品,从未生成过关于环境风险的一致数据。在本项目中,开发了一种基于风险的简单排序程序,该程序应能够评估兽药活性物质的环境风险潜力。在欧盟,已识别出约2000种含有741种活性物质的产品。在预筛选步骤中,根据欧洲药品管理局发布的技术指南,294种天然物质、复杂混合物和预期暴露量低的物质被排除在排序程序之外。对于233种活性物质,整理了关于4种暴露情景的充分信息:集约化养殖动物、牧场动物、伴侣动物和水产养殖。排序方法分4个阶段进行:(1)使用量估算;(2)根据暴露情景对土壤、粪便、地表水和水生生物的暴露特征进行描述;(3)基于治疗剂量的效应特征描述;(4)风险特征描述,即暴露与效应的比值(风险指数)及排序。一般来说,排名靠前的物质来自兽药中的抗生素和杀寄生虫剂类别。通过应用于集约化养殖动物或牧场动物,土壤中物质的排名存在差异。例如,在集约化养殖中,抗球虫药作为饲料给药药物(饲料添加剂)长时间以相对较大剂量使用。对于牧场动物,这些物质即使使用也较少,因此排名较低。除此之外,水产养殖中使用的或应用于伴侣动物的物质在水生态系统中的风险指数较大。总之,为本项目开发的排序方案提供了一种基于科学且务实的手段,用于评估兽药进行进一步详细风险评估的相对优先级。本项目的成果将在兽药产品寻求市场应用授权时为制药行业和主管当局提供支持。