Royal Institute of Technology/Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Department of Philosophy and the History of Technology, Teknikringen 78B, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden.
Sci Total Environ. 2010 May 1;408(11):2327-39. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.02.020. Epub 2010 Mar 5.
The Swedish environmental and classification system for pharmaceuticals is a voluntary, industry-owned system with the purpose to provide environmental information about active pharmaceutical ingredients in the Swedish market. In this paper we report the results from a detailed evaluation of the accuracy and consistency of the risk assessments conducted within this system. The evaluation focused on the following three aspects: 1) comparison of the companies' risk assessments with the classification system's own guidance document, 2) how the risk assessments are affected if additional effect data is used, and 3) the consistency of different risk assessments for the same pharmaceutical substance. The analyses show that the system's guidance gives no criteria for when to consider a study "long-term" or "short-term", and that this confusion affected the outcome of the risk assessments in some cases. Furthermore, when the system's guidance document is followed and the risk assessment was supplemented with effect data from the open scientific literature, then the risk classification for a substantial number of the evaluated substances was altered. Our analyses also revealed that in some cases risk assessors disagree on the outcome of the assessment for the same active pharmaceutical ingredient. Finally we list some recommendations to improve the classification system. The recommendations include clarifying concepts and instructions in the guidance document, introduction of a standardized way of reporting data to the website, and promotion of use of non-standard test data when considered the most relevant.
瑞典药品环境和分类系统是一个自愿性的、由行业拥有的系统,旨在提供瑞典市场上活性药物成分的环境信息。在本文中,我们报告了对该系统内进行的风险评估的准确性和一致性进行详细评估的结果。该评估侧重于以下三个方面:1)将公司的风险评估与分类系统自身的指导文件进行比较,2)如果使用额外的效应数据,风险评估将如何受到影响,以及 3)同一药物物质的不同风险评估的一致性。分析表明,该系统的指导文件没有给出何时将一项研究定义为“长期”或“短期”的标准,这种混淆在某些情况下影响了风险评估的结果。此外,当遵循系统的指导文件并将风险评估补充来自开放科学文献的效应数据时,评估的物质中有相当一部分的风险分类发生了改变。我们的分析还表明,在某些情况下,风险评估者对同一活性药物成分的评估结果存在分歧。最后,我们列出了一些改进分类系统的建议。这些建议包括澄清指导文件中的概念和说明,引入向网站报告数据的标准化方式,并在认为最相关时推广使用非标准测试数据。