An expert panel was convened to provide insight and guidance on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) grouping for the purposes of protecting human health from drinking water exposures, and how risks to PFAS mixtures should be assessed. These questions were addressed through multiple rounds of blind, independent responses to charge questions, and review and comments on co-panelists responses. The experts agreed that the lack of consistent interpretations of human health risk for well-studied PFAS and the lack of information for the vast majority of PFAS present significant challenges for any mixtures risk assessment approach. Most experts agreed that “all PFAS” should not be grouped together, persistence alone is not sufficient for grouping PFAS for the purposes of assessing human health risk, and that the definition of appropriate subgroups can only be defined on a case-by-case manner. Most panelists agreed that it is inappropriate to assume equal toxicity/potency across the diverse class of PFAS. A tiered approach combining multiple lines of evidence was presented as a possible viable means for addressing PFAS that lack analytical and/or toxicological studies. Most PFAS risk assessments will need to employ assumptions that are more likely to overestimate risk than to underestimate risk, given the choice of assumptions regarding dose-response model, uncertainty factors, and exposure information.
The methods and results for this panel engagement has been published: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273230022001131?via%3Dihub