Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge
Recent Additions | Contact Us
You are here: EPA Home
(HPV) Challenge Program

HPV Challenge
Home
Basic Information
HPV Chemical Data
- HPV Information
System (HPVIS)
Public Use of HPV
Chemical Data
EPA Chemical Data
Screening, Review,
& Characterization
Voluntary Chemical
Sponsorships
EPA Regulatory
Activities for
Unsponsored
Chemicals
Related Links

Search:

All EPA

Bookmark

This Area

Prevention, Pesticides & Toxic Substances
Pollution Prevention & Toxics
Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries

High Production Volume

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust
Summaries
(October 22, 1999)
The guidance in the following tables are presented exactly as they appear in the official OECD
document entitled "Guidance for Developing Robust Summaries for SIDS Dossiers" (Document
number ENV/JM/EXCH(99)13, dated 10/8/99). EPA provides the following narrative as an
introduction to the OECD tables.
Definition/Background
The purpose of the U.S. HPV Chemical Challenge Program is to make hazard data (either existing or
newly acquired information) available to the public for all U.S. high production volume chemicals.
Most HPV Challenge sponsors will have at least some existing data in the form of full study reports
for some or all of the endpoints in the Screening Information Data Set (SIDS). Sponsors need to
determine whether available information already adequately describes a given endpoint. EPA
guidance for determining data adequacy has already been provided. Once one or more studies have
been identified as adequate, then they need to be made public in the Challenge Program. From a
practical standpoint, it is not reasonable to attempt to create an electronic version of full study
reports (especially old reports that may date to the 1960s or earlier). Instead, electronic summaries
of full study reports will be prepared that contain the appropriate technical information for that
particular endpoint.
The purpose of this document is to present guidance on what technical information, on an endpointby-endpoint basis, is necessary to adequately describe an experiment or study. The term "robust
summary" is used to describe this technical content. Robust study summaries are intended to
provide sufficient information to allow a technically qualified person to make an independent
assessment of a given study report without having to go back to the full study report, and to also
allow evaluation of the proposed test plan. A robust study summary therefore reflects the
objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of the full study report, which can either be an
experiment or in some cases an estimation or prediction method.
Which Studies Require Robust Summaries?
A complete robust study summary should be prepared for at least one key or critical study for each
SIDS endpoint that has been considered adequate according to EPA guidance. Robust summaries
may also be prepared for other adequate studies that are considered supportive of the key study.
When you don't have an adequate study, but some information is available, it is suggested that
robust summaries be prepared for each study. In addition, a single "best" study would contain a
weight-of-the-evidence analysis in its remarks section (see below) which refers to, and ties
together, the other studies.
Origin of the Guidance
The templates for robust study summaries presented in the following pages were based on: (1)

1 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

current guidance in the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) SIDS
Manual; (2) work carried out by the US EPA in the context of the US HPV Challenge Program; (3)
work carried out by the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA) and the Business and Industry
Association Council (BIAC) relating to both the U.S. Challenge Program and the OECD SIDS
program; and (4) work relating to the International Uniform Chemical Information Database
(IUCLID) carried out by the European Commission. The draft guidance contained in this document is
currently being considered by an international group of scientists associated with the OECD for its
usefulness in the OECD SIDS program. Therefore, while there might be some changes made over
the next few months, the EPA believes it is useful to place these templates on our website as
guidance for early submitters and those who have been following the discussion of this issue over the
past year. EPA intends to combine this document with the data adequacy document because the
guidance presented herein simply captures the information gleaned during the data adequacy
determination.
Robust Study Summary Templates
A series of templates for the different SIDS endpoints have been developed. They have been
structured to allow for computerised data entry by describing the items in each robust study
summary as "data fields" with allowance for free text. The proposed robust study summary
templates have seven sections on: Test Substance, Methods, Results, Conclusion, Data Quality,
References, and Other.
In the following pages, templates for the listed SIDS endpoints are provided:
Physical/Chemical Elements
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)

Melting point
Boiling point
Vapor pressure
Partition coefficient
Water solubility

Environmental Fate and Pathways Elements
6)
7)
8)
9)

Photodegradation
Stability in water
Transport between Environmental Compartments (Fugacity)
Biodegradation

Ecotoxicity Elements
10) Acute toxicity to fish
11) Toxicity to aquatic plants
12) Acute toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
Health Elements
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)

Acute toxicity
Genetic toxicity in vivo(chromosomal aberrations)
Genetic toxicity in vitro (gene mutations)
Repeat dose toxicity
Reproductive Toxicity
Developmental Toxicity/Teratogenicity

No templates are currently available for non-SIDS endpoints. Information on these is nevertheless
encouraged to be included where available and relevant to the assessment.
Explanation of the Templates

2 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Each template identifies the information items that should be included in a robust study summary for
that SIDS endpoint. As many items of information as possible should be provided since robust study
summaries concern the key study(s) on which the assessment of each SIDS endpoint is based. It is
generally expected that the most adequate, reliable, and relevant study for each SIDS endpoint will
be clearly identified and reported to the fullest level of the template. In cases where the study is
considered inadequate, this should be clearly marked together with the reasons.
Each template is composed of seven sections, each section each of which has two different types of
fields: controlled vocabulary and free text. The controlled vocabulary fields are identified in the
templates by individual bullets, which are required to be filled out, while the free text field under
each section entitled "Remarks"

allows the input of optional information.

Often, the "Remarks" section can be used as a means to further explain the contents of a particular
section, much as is done in the "Discussion" portion of a publication in academic journals. For
example, under the "Results" section, unexpected results could be further explained in the
"Remarks" field (i.e., results seen were due to the complex nature of the test substance, deviations
in protocol, etc.).
Test substance
This refers to the identity of the HPV chemical. If the chemical used in the specific test was different
from the specific HPV chemical in identity (purity, additives, different solvent carrier, etc), then
those differences need to be noted in the Test Substance Remarks field together with the chemical
name, CAS number, purity of the materials, additives, and chemical structure as appropriate. If the
chemical(s) is listed in the IUCLID system, it would also be useful to have an IUCLID identification
number.
Methods
This section refers to the methodologies used to conduct the study. If the study was done according
to OECD Test Guidelines, or other widely recognized guidelines, then it does not need to be fully
described. For example, only the name of the guideline (e.g., OECD 421) needs to be reported. If
there have been deviations from the Test Guideline, then those deviations that will significantly
impact either the study reliability or the interpretation of the data need to be individually listed. On
the other hand, if a study is based on a guideline that is not widely recognized, more items under
the "Remarks" field may need to be included to justify use of the guideline.
There may also be situations in which a single study addresses several endpoints, such as with a
study that follows the OECD combined repeat dose/reproduction/developmental Test Guideline 421.
In this example, if this single study was to be the key one for each of these endpoints, then three
separate robust study summaries would be prepared for each endpoint - all pointing to the same
study.
Results
This section has standard items to fill in under discrete bullets, and also a "Remarks" field with
additional items that may be needed to adequately assess data for reliability and use. At a
minimum, qualitative descriptions of elements where dose-related observations were seen should be
described.
Conclusions
This section has a "Remarks" field only, so that the conclusions of the study can be noted if given,
together with any comments by the person preparing the robust study summary.

3 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Data Quality
This section can be used to denote the adequacy of data, at the discretion of the person preparing
the robust study summary
References
This free text field allows the person preparing the robust study summary to provide the full citation
for the critical study on which the robust study summary is based.
Other
This section includes a data field for revisions, a number useful for sorting, and a free text field for
general remarks.
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL ELEMENTS
1) MELTING POINT
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed (include calculated as one of the possible methods)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)

Remarks field for Test Conditions (Detail and discuss any significant protocol deviations.)
RESULTS
Melting point value in °C (include <0°C as an acceptable answer)
Decomposition (yes-temperature °C/ no /ambiguous)
Sublimation (yes/no/ambiguous)

Remarks field for Results (Describe additional information that may be needed to confirm data
reliability and relevance)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag for key study)

Remarks field for Data Reliability key

4 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for clarification.)

2) BOILING POINT
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific remarks.)
METHOD
Method (include calculated as one of the possible methods)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)

Remarks field for Test Conditions (Detail and discuss any signification protocol deviations.)
RESULTS
Boiling point value in °C (include >300°C as acceptable answer)
Pressure
Pressure unit
Decomposition (yes/no/ambiguous)

Remarks field for Results (Describe additional information that may be needed to adequately
assess data for reliability and use.)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)

5 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any comments necessary for clarification.)

3) VAPOUR PRESSURE
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific remarks.)
METHOD
Method (include calculated as one of the possible methods)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)

Remarks field for Test Conditions (Detail and discuss any significant protocol deviations.)
RESULTS
-5

Vapor Pressure value (include < 1 x 10 Pa as an acceptable answer)
Temperature °C
Decomposition (yes/no/ambiguous)

Remarks field for Results (Describe additional information that may be needed to adequately
assess data for reliability and use.)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER

6 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any comments necessary for clarification.)

4) PARTITION COEFFICIENT
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific remarks).
METHOD
Method (include calculated as one of the possible methods)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)

Remarks field for Test Conditions (Detail and discuss any signification protocol deviations.)
RESULTS
Log Pow
Temperature °C

Remarks field for Results (Describe additional information that may be needed to adequately
assess data for reliability and use. In particular note if compound is surface active, dissociative,
insoluble in water, etc.)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

7 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any comments necessary for clarification.)

5) WATER SOLUBILITY
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific remarks.)
METHOD
Method (include calculated as one of the possible methods)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)

Remarks field for Test Conditions (Detail and discuss any signification protocol deviations.)
RESULTS
Value (mg/L) at temperature °C
Description of solubility (e.g., miscible to soluble to not soluble) (see Note 6 below)
pH value and concentration at temperature °C
pKa value at 25 °C

Remarks field for Results (Describe additional information that may be needed to adequately
assess data for reliability and use.)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any comments necessary for clarification.)

8 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND PATHWAY ELEMENTS
6) PHOTODEGRADATION
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed (include calculated as one of the possible methods)
Type (test type)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Light Source
Light Spectrum (nm)
Relative Intensity based on Intensity of Sunlight
Spectrum of substance (max lambda, max epsilon and epsilon 295)

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations. Detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:
- Test medium (air, water, soil, other - specify)
- Duration
- Positive Controls
- Negative Controls

RESULTS
Concentration of Substance
Temperature °C
Direct photolysis
- Half-life t ½ (preferred)
- Degradation % after
- Quantum yield
Indirect photolysis
- Sensitizer (type)
- Concentration of sensitizer
- Rate Constant
- Degradation % after

9 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Breakdown products (yes/no) If yes describe breakdown products and whether they
were transient or stable in the Remarks field for Results.

Remarks field for Results (Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use.)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
Last changes (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

7) STABILITY IN WATER
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed (include calculated as one of the possible methods)
Type (test type)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations. Detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:
- Duration (days)
- Positive Controls

10 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

- Negative Controls
- Analytical procedures
RESULTS
Nominal
Measured value (the value with units preferably as mg/L)
Degradation % at a specified pH and temperature °C % after a specified time or
Half-life (t(1/2) in days or hours at a specific pH (pH 4, 7, 9, and other) and temperature)
Breakdown products (yes/no) If yes describe breakdown products and whether they
were transient or stable in the Remarks field for Results.

Remarks field for Results (Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use.)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

8) TRANSPORT BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL COMPARTMENTS(FUGACITY)
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Test (test type)

11 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Method (Y/N)
Year (study performed)

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail the model used (title, version and date) and
the input parameters (chemical-specific, environmental conditions) as necessary.
RESULTS
Media
Estimated Distribution and Media Concentration (levels II/III)

Remarks field for Results. Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use including the following if available:
- Absorption coefficient
- Desorption
- Volatility
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

9) BIODEGRADATION
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)

12 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

METHOD
Method/guideline followed (include calculated as one of the possible methods)
Test Type (test type/aerobic/anaerobic)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Contact time (units)
Innoculum

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations, whether there was bacterial inhibition, and detail differences from the guideline
followed including the following as appropriate:

- Innoculum (concentration and source)
· Fresh activated sludge
· Sludge from SCAS test (concentration and time of adaptation),
or
· Other

- Concentration of test chemical, vehicle used, pre-acclimation conditions
- Temperature of incubation °C
- Dosing procedure
- Sampling frequency
- Appropriate controls and blank system used?
- Analytical method used to measure biodegradation
- Method of calculating measured concentrations (i.e., arithmetic mean,
geometric mean, etc.)
RESULTS
Degradation % after time
Results
Kinetic (for sample, positive and negative controls)
- For each time period %
Breakdown products (yes/no) If yes describe breakdown products and whether they
were transient or stable in the Remarks field for Results.

Remarks field for Results (Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use, e.g. lag time, observed inhibition, excessive
biodegradation, excessive standard deviation, kinetics, time required for 10% degradation
and total degradation at the end of the test.)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter

13 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

ECOTOXICITY ELEMENTS
10) ACUTE TOXICITY TO FISH
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed (experimental/calculated)
Type (test type)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Species/Strain/Supplier
Analytical monitoring
Exposure period (unit)
Statistical methods

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations, and detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:

- Test fish (Age/length/weight, loading, pretreatment) - Test conditions, e.g.
· Details of test (static, semi-static, flow-through)
· Dilution water source

14 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

· Dilution water chemistry (hardness, alkalinity, pH, TOC, TSS,
salinity)
· Stock and test solution and how they are prepared
· Concentrations dosing rate, flow-through rate, in what medium
· Vehicle/solvent and concentrations
· Stability of the test chemical solutions
· Exposure vessel type (e.g., size, headspace, sealed, aeration,
lighting, # per treatment)
· Number of replicates, fish per replicate
· Water chemistry in test (D.O., pH) in the control and one
concentration where effects were observed
- Test temperature range - Method of calculating mean measured
concentrations (i.e. arithmetic mean, geometric mean, etc.)
RESULTS
Nominal concentrations (as mg/L)
Measured concentrations (as mg/L)
Unit (results expressed in what unit)
Element value (e.g. LC50, LCo, LL50, or LL0 at 48, 72 and 96 hours, etc., based on
measured or nominal concentrations)
Statistical results, as appropriate

Remarks field for Results. Discuss if element effect concentration is greater than
materials solubility. Describe additional information that may be needed to adequately
assess data for reliability and use, including the following, if available:

- Biological observations
- Table showing cumulative mortality
- Lowest test substance concentration causing 100% mortality
- Mortality of controls
- Abnormal responses
- Reference substances (if used) - results
- Any observations, such as precipitation that might cause a difference
between measured and nominal values.

CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER

15 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

11) TOXICITY TO AQUATIC PLANTS (E.G., ALGAE)
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed (experimental/calculated)
Test type (static/other)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Species/strain # and source
Element basis (i.e. number of cells/ml, area under the curve, growth rate, etc.)
Exposure period, date of start and end of the test [Duration]
Analytical monitoring
Statistical methods

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations and detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:

- Test organisms

· Laboratory culture
· Method of cultivation
· Controls

- Test Conditions

· Test temperature range
· Growth/test medium chemistry (hardness, alkalinity, pH, TOC,
TSS, dissolved oxygen, salinity, EDTA)
· Dilution water source
· Exposure vessel type (e.g., size, headspace, sealed, aeration, #

16 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

per treatment)
· Water chemistry in test (pH) in at least one replicate of each
concentration (at start and end of the test)
· Stock solutions preparation (vehicle, solvent, concentrations)
· Light levels and quality during exposure
- Test design (number of replicates, concentrations)
- Method of calculating mean measured concentrations (i.e. arithmetic mean,
geometric mean, etc.)

RESULTS
Nominal concentrations in mg/L
Measured concentrations in mg/L
Unit [results expressed in what unit]
Element value (e.g. ErC50, ErL50, EbC50, EbL50, EC10-CD, EL10-CD, EC50-CD, EL50-CD,
EL90-CD, EC90-CD, EC0, or EL0 at 24, 48, 72 or 96 hours) Note whether cells removed prior to
measurement.
NOEC, LOEC, or NOEL, LOEL
Was control response satisfactory (yes/no/unknown)
Statistical results, as appropriate

Remarks field for Results. Discuss if element effect concentration is not less than
materials solubility. Describe additional information that may be needed to adequately
assess data for reliability and use including the following:

- Biological observations
· Cell density at each flask at each measuring point
· Growth curves
Percent biomass/growth rate inhibition per concentration
Observations
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')
Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

17 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

12) ACUTE TOXICITY TO AQUATIC INVERTEBRATES (E.G., DAPHNIA)
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.
METHOD
Method/guideline followed (experimental/calculated)
Test type
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Analytical procedures
Species/Strain
Test details (static, semi-static, dosing rate, flow-through rate, etc.)
Statistical methods

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations and detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:

- Test organisms
· source, supplier, any pretreatment, breeding method
· Age at study initiation
· Control group
- Test conditions
· Stock solutions preparation (vehicle, solvent, concentrations)
and stability
· Test temperature range
· Exposure vessel type (e.g., size, headspace, sealed, aeration, #
per treatment)
· Dilution water source
· Dilution water chemistry (hardness, alkalinity, pH, TOC, TSS,
salinity, Ca/Mg ratio, Na/K ratio)
· Lighting (quality, intensity and periodicity)
· Water chemistry in test (D.O., pH) in the control and at least one
concentration where effects were observed

- Element (unit) basis (i.e. immobilization)

18 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

- Test design (number of replicates, individuals per replicate, concentrations)
- Method of calculating mean measured concentrations (i.e. arithmetic mean,
geometric mean, etc.)
- Exposure period
- Analytical monitoring

RESULTS
Nominal concentrations in mg/L
Measured concentrations in mg/L
Unit [results expressed in what unit]
EC50, EL50, LC0, LL0, at 24, 48 hours
Statistical results, as appropriate

Remarks field for Results. Discuss if element effect concentration is not less than
materials solubility. Describe additional information that may be needed to adequately
assess data for reliability and use including the following as appropriate:

- Biological observations
· Number immobilized as compared to the number exposed
· Concentration response with 95% confidence limits
· Cumulative immobilization
· Was control response satisfactory (yes/no/unknown)
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

HEALTH ELEMENTS

19 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm
13) ACUTE TOXICITY

TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed (experimental/calculated)
Type (test type)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Species/Strain
Sex
No. of animals per sex per dose
Vehicle
Route of administration (if inhalation - aerosol, vapor, gas, particulate)

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations and detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:

- Age
- Doses (OECD guidelines 401 and 425 do not provide dose levels, so these
must be described in detail)
- Doses per time period
- Volume administered or concentration
- Post dose observation period
- Exposure duration (for inhalation studies).

RESULTS
Value [LD50 or LC50] with confidence limits if calculated
Number of deaths at each dose level

Remarks field for Results. Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use, including the following, if available:

- Time of death (provide individual animal time if less than 24 hours after
dosing)
- Description, severity, time of onset and duration of clinical signs at each
dose level
- Necropsy findings, included doses affected, severity and number of animals
affected
- Potential target organs (if identified in the report)

20 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

- If both sexes tested, results should be compared
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

GENETIC TOXICITY ELEMENTS
14) GENETIC TOXICITY IN VIVO (CHROMOSOMAL ABERRATIONS)
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed
Type (test type)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Species
Strain
Sex
Route of administration (if inhalation - aerosol, vapor, gas, particulate)
Doses/concentration levels
Exposure period
Statistical methods

21 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations and detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:

- Age at study initiation
- No. of animals per dose
- Vehicle
- Duration of test
- Frequency of treatment
- Sampling times and number of samples
- Control groups and treatment
- Clinical observations performed (clinical pathology, functional observations,
etc.)
- Organs examined at necropsy (macroscopic and microscopic)
- Criteria for evaluating results (for example, cell types examined, number of
cells counted in a mouse micronucleus test)
- Criteria for selection of M.T.D.

RESULTS
Effect on mitotic index or PCE/NCE ratio by dose level by sex
Genotoxic effects (positive, negative, unconfirmed, dose-response, equivocal)
NOAEL(NOEL) (C)/LOAEL(LOEL) (C)
Statistical results, as appropriate

Remarks field for Results Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use, including the following, if available:

- Mortality at each dose level by sex
- Mutant/aberration/mPCE/polyploidy frequency, as appropriate
- Description, severity, time of onset and duration of clinical signs at each
dose level and sex
- Body weight changes by dose and sex
- Food/water consumption changes by dose and sex

CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability

22 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

15) GENETIC TOXICITY IN VITRO (GENE MUTATIONS)
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed
Type (e.g. reverse mutation assay, gene mutation study, cytogenetic assay,
mammalian cell gene mutation assay, cytogenetic assay, etc.)
System of testing [bacterial, non bacterial]
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Species/Strain or cell type and or cell line, bacterial or non-bacterial
Metabolic activation
- Species and cell type
- Quantity
- Induced or not induced
Concentrations tested
Statistical Methods

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations. Detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:

- Test Design
· Number of replicates
· Frequency of Dosing
· Positive and negative control groups and treatment
· Number of metaphases analyzed
- Solvent

23 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

- Description of follow up repeat study
- Criteria for evaluating results (e.g. cell evaluated per dose
group)
RESULTS
Result
Cytotoxic concentration
- With metabolic activation
- Without metabolic activation

Genotoxic effects (e.g. positive, negative, unconfirmed, dose-response, equivocal)
- With metabolic activation
- Without metabolic activation
Statistical results, as appropriate

Remarks field for Results. Note test-specific confounding factors such as pH,
osmolarity, whether substance is volatile, water soluble, precipitated, etc., particularly if
they effect the selection of test concentrations or interpretation of the results. Describe
additional information that may be needed to adequately assess data for reliability and use
include the following if available. Provide at a minimum qualitative descriptions of elements
where dose effect related observations were seen.
- Frequency of reversions/mutations/aberrations, polyploidy as appropriate
- Precipitation concentration if applicable
- Mitotic index

CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

24 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

16) REPEATED DOSE TOXICITY
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed
Test type
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Species
Strain
Route of administration, oral (gavage, drinking water, feed), dermal, inhalation (aerosol,
vapor, gas, particulate), other
Duration of test
Doses/concentration levels
Sex
Exposure period
Frequency of treatment
Control group and treatment
Post exposure observation period
Statistical methods

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations and detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:

- Test Subjects
· Age at study initiation
· No. of animals per sex per dose
- Study Design
· Vehicle
· Satellite groups and reasons they were added
· Clinical observations performed and frequency (clinical
pathology, functional observations, etc.)
· Organs examined at necropsy (macroscopic and microscopic)
RESULTS
NOAEL (NOEL)

25 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

LOAEL (LOEL)
Actual dose received by dose level by sex, if known,
Toxic response/effects by dose level
Statistical results, as appropriate

Remarks field for Results. Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use include the following if available. Provide at a
minimum qualitative descriptions of elements where dose effect related observations were
seen.

- Body weight
- Food/water consumption
- Description, severity, time of onset and duration of clinical signs
- Ophthalmologic findings incidence and severity
- Hematological findings incidence and severity
- Clinical biochemistry findings incidence and severity
- Mortality and time to death
- Gross pathology incidence and severity
- Organ weight changes
- Histopathology incidence and severity
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks [Note - Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.]

17) TOXICITY TO REPRODUCTION
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

26 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed
Type (one generation, two generation, etc.)
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Species
Strain
Route of administration - oral (gavage, drinking water, feed), dermal, inhalation
(aerosol, vapor, gas, particulate), other
Doses/concentration levels
Sex
Control group and treatment
Frequency of treatment
Duration of test
Premating exposure period for males (P and F1) as appropriate
Premating exposure period for females (P and F1) as appropriate
Statistical methods

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations and detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:
- Test animals
· Number, age, sex per dose for P, F1 and F2, if appropriate
- Test design
· Vehicle
· Dosing schedules and pre and post dosing observations
periods for P, F1 and F2, if appropriate
- Mating procedures (M/F ratios per cage, length of cohabitation, proof of
pregnancy)
- Standardization of litters (yes/no and if yes, how and when )
- Parameters assessed during study P and F1 as appropriate
· Clinical observations performed and frequency (clinical
pathology, functional observations, etc.)
· Estrous cycle length and pattern (number of days spent in each
phase)
· Sperm examination (epididymal or vas sperm, concentration,
motility, morphology)
- Parameters assessed during study F1 and F2, as appropriate
· Clinical observations performed and frequency (weight gain,
growth rate, etc.)

27 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

· Others, for example anogenital distance, if performed
· Organs examined at necropsy (macroscopic and microscopic)
RESULTS
NOAEL (NOEL) and LOAEL (LOEL) for P, F1 and F2, as appropriate
Actual dose received by dose level by sex if known
Parental data and F1 as appropriate (toxic response/effects with NOAEL value). Provide
at a minimum qualitative descriptions of elements were dose related observations were
seen
Offspring toxicity F1 and F2, as appropriate (toxic response/effects with NOAEL value).
Provide at a minimum qualitative descriptions of elements where dose related observations
were seen.
Statistical results, as appropriate

Remarks field for Results. Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use include the following when there are dose
related effects if available:

- Parental data and F1 as appropriate, provide at a minimum qualitative
descriptions of elements were dose related observations were seen
- Body weight
- Food/water consumption
- Description, severity, time of onset and duration of clinical signs
- Fertility index (pregnancies/matings)
- Precoital interval (w/number of days until mating and number of estrous
periods until mating)
- Duration of gestation (calculated from day 0 of pregnancy)
- Gestation index (live litters/pregnancies)
- Changes in lactation
- Changes in estrus cycles
- Effects on sperm
- Hematological findings incidence and severity
- Clinical biochemistry findings incidence and severity
- Mortality
- Gross pathology incidence and severity
- Number of implantations
- Number of corpora lutea (recommended)
- Ovarian primordial follicle counts
- Organ weight changes
· Histopathology incidence and severity
- Offspring toxicity F1 and F2, as appropriate, provide as a minimum
qualitative descriptions of elements where dose related observations were
seen
- Litter size and weights
- Sex and sex ratios
- Viability index (pups surviving 4 days/total births)
- post natal survival until weaning
- Effects on offspring (grossly visible abnormalities)
- Postnatal growth, growth rate
- Vaginal opening (F) or preputial separation (M)
- Other observations, for instance anogenital distance, if measured
- Organ weights

28 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

· Gross pathology
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

18) DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY/TERATOGENICITY
TEST SUBSTANCE
Identity

Remarks field for Test Substance (Use for any pertinent, test substance-specific
remarks.)
METHOD
Method/guideline followed
GLP (Y/N)
Year (study performed)
Species
Strain
Route of administration - oral (gavage, drinking water, feed), dermal, inhalation
(aerosol, vapor, gas, particulate), other
Doses/concentration levels
Sex
Exposure period
Frequency of treatment
Control group and treatment
Duration of test

29 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

Statistical methods

Remarks field for Test Conditions. Detail and discuss any significant protocol
deviations and detail differences from the guideline followed including the following as
appropriate:
- Age at study initiation
- Number of animals per dose per sex
- Vehicle
- Clinical observations performed and frequency
- Mating procedures (M/F ratios per cage, length of cohabitation, proof of
pregnancy)
- Parameters assessed during study (maternal and fetal)
- Organs examined at necropsy (macroscopic and microscopic)

RESULTS
NOAEL (NOEL) and LOAEL (LOEL) maternal toxicity
NOAEL (NOEL) and LOAEL (LOEL) developmental toxicity
Actual dose received by dose level by sex if available
Maternal data with dose level (with NOAEL value). Provide at a minimum qualitative
descriptions of responses where dose related effects were seen.
Fetal data with dose level (with NOAEL value). Provide at a minimum qualitative
descriptions of responses where dose related effects were seen.
Statistical results, as appropriate

Remarks for Results. Describe additional information that may be needed to
adequately assess data for reliability and use include the following when there are dose
related effects if available: Maternal data, provide at a minimum qualitative descriptions of
responses where dose related effects were seen.
- Mortality and day of death
- Number pregnant per dose level
- Number aborting
- Number of resorptions, early/late if available
- Number of implantations
- Pre and post implantation loss, if available
- Number of corpora lutea (recommended)
- Duration of Pregnancy
- Body weight
- Food/water consumption
- Description, severity, time of onset and duration of clinical signs
- Hematological findings incidence and severity
- Clinical biochemistry findings incidence and severity
- Gross pathology incidence and severity
- Organ weight changes, particularly effects on total uterine weight
- Histopathology incidence and severity
- Fetal data, provide at a minimum qualitative descriptions of responses where
dose related effects were seen
· Litter size and weights
· Number viable (number alive and number dead)

30 of 31

Draft Guidance on Developing Robust Summaries | High Production Volu...

http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm

· Sex ratio
· Postnatal growth (depending on protocol)
· Postnatal survival (depending on protocol)
· Grossly visible abnormalities, external, soft tissue and skeletal
abnormalities
CONCLUSIONS

Remarks field with the ability to identify source of comment, i.e. author and/or
submitter
DATA QUALITY
Reliabilities (Klimisch Code, if used, possibly a flag if 'key study')

Remarks field for Data Reliability
REFERENCES (Free Text)
OTHER
Last changed (administrative field for updating)
Order number for sorting (administrative field)

Remarks field for General Remarks (Use for any other comments necessary for
clarification.)

EPA Home

Privacy and Security Notice

Contact Us

Last updated on Wednesday, November 28th, 2007.
http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/general/robsumgd.htm
Print As-Is
This document will now print as it appears on screen when you use the File » Print command.
Use View » Refresh to return to original state.

31 of 31