Sensory irritation and use of the best available science in setting exposure limits: Issues raised by a scientific panel review of formaldehyde human research studies.

As a high production volume chemical with recognized sensory irritation and widespread exposure, the human health risk potential of formaldehyde has been reviewed by many international regulatory agencies and scientific advisory bodies. A scientific panel, the Human Studies Review Board, under the auspices of the EPA's Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) program recently reviewed the sensory irritation studies included in the 2022 Draft Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Formaldehyde Hazard Assessment in the context of their use in a weight of evidence evaluation of acute inhalation health effects. This panel issued a series of recommendations on the use of these studies for the purposes of calculating exposure limits (e.g., study design preferences; uncertainty adjustment). Considering that these recommendations might reflect topic areas with varying degrees of scientific consensus, this commentary reflects on commonalities and distinctions amongst international formaldehyde exposure limits based on sensory irritation. Notably, each review panel charged with an assessment of the science recommended that no adjustment was needed to account for either exposure duration or human variability. These areas of scientific consensus should be considered as the best available science for the purposes of setting exposure limits in the anticipated TSCA Risk Evaluation on formaldehyde.

Exposure limits for indoor volatile substances concerning the general population: The role of population-based differences in sensory irritation of the eyes and airways for assessment factors.

Assessment factors (AFs) are essential in the derivation of occupational exposure limits (OELs) and indoor air quality guidelines. The factors shall accommodate differences in sensitivity between subgroups, i.e., workers, healthy and sick people, and occupational exposure versus life-long exposure for the general population. Derivation of AFs itself is based on empirical knowledge from human and animal exposure studies with immanent uncertainty in the empirical evidence due to knowledge gaps and experimental reliability. Sensory irritation in the eyes and airways constitute about 30-40% of OELs and is an abundant symptom in non-industrial buildings characterizing the indoor air quality and general health. Intraspecies differences between subgroups of the general population should be quantified for the proposal of more 'empirical' based AFs. In this review, we focus on sensitivity differences in sensory irritation about gender, age, health status, and vulnerability in people, based solely on human exposure studies. Females are more sensitive to sensory irritation than males for few volatile substances. Older people appear less sensitive than younger ones. However, impaired defense mechanisms may increase vulnerability in the long term. Empirical evidence of sensory irritation in children is rare and limited to children down to the age of six years. Studies of the nervous system in children compared to adults suggest a higher sensitivity in children; however, some defense mechanisms are more efficient in children than in adults. Usually, exposure studies are performed with healthy subjects. Exposure studies with sick people are not representative due to the deselection of subjects with moderate or severe eye or airway diseases, which likely underestimates the sensitivity of the group of people with diseases. Psychological characterization like personality factors shows that concentrations of volatile substances far below their sensory irritation thresholds may influence the sensitivity, in part biased by odor perception. Thus, the protection of people with extreme personality traits is not feasible by an AF and other mitigation strategies are required. The available empirical evidence comprising age, lifestyle, and health supports an AF of not greater than up to 2 for sensory irritation. Further, general AFs are discouraged for derivation, rather substance-specific derivation of AFs is recommended based on the risk assessment of empirical data, deposition in the airways depending on the substance's water solubility and compensating for knowledge and experimental gaps. Modeling of sensory irritation would be a better 'empirical' starting point for derivation of AFs for children, older, and sick people, as human exposure studies are not possible (due to ethical reasons) or not generalizable (due to self-selection). Dedicated AFs may be derived for environments where dry air, high room temperature, and visually demanding tasks aggravate the eyes or airways than for places in which the workload is balanced, while indoor playgrounds might need other AFs due to physical workload and affected groups of the general population.

Plethysmograph training: A refinement for collection of respiration data in mice.

Inhaled chemicals can harm the airways. Different effects can result in distinct changes in respiratory patterns; the type of change indicates where and how the respiratory system is affected. Furthermore, changes in respiratory patterns may be detected at much lower substance concentrations than those that cause more serious effects, such as histopathological changes. Changes in respiratory patterns can be studied experimentally by monitoring the breathing of mice placed in plethysmographs and exposing head-out to the test substance. The method is well established; however, it is not known if training mice in being restrained in the plethysmograph could increase the quality of data collection. Here we report the results of training mice to be restrained in plethysmographs for 5 consecutive days, with respect to body weight, respiratory parameters, and time spent in the plethysmograph, before they are removed because of unstable breathing patterns. The mice tolerated the procedure better (measured by time in the plethysmograph) on the second day of training than the first day. Training did not change the breathing parameters between days. Breathing parameters stabilized within 5 min after the mice were placed in the plethysmographs on all days. There was an average of 3% weight loss between the first and last days of the training, indicating that the training procedure placed some strain on the animals. Training reduces the number of mice attempting to escape from the plethysmograph.

Sensory irritation to methylparaben is caused by its low metabolism in the skin.

Sensitive skin is a well- known skin condition showing sensory irritation to daily used products such as cosmetics or pharmaceuticals, possibly containing sensory irritants. Methylparaben (MP), widely used as a preservative, is a representative sensory irritant and hydrolyzed in the skin. We aimed to clarify the relationship between MP sensory irritation and MP hydrolysis. First, we investigated the percutaneous penetration and hydrolysis of MP by using an ex vivo pig skin system and confirmed that topically applied MP was immediately hydrolyzed to p-hydroxybenzoic acid (PHBA). We next evaluated whether MP or PHBA causes sensory irritation using a well-used stinging test in human skin and found that MP, but not PHBA, induced irritation. Additionally, MP, but not PHBA, increased intracellular calcium in cultured TRPA1-expressed HEK293 cells, supporting the stimulatory activity of MP. Five and 10 individuals with sensitive and non-sensitive skin, respectively, were selected by a questionnaire and stinging test. In their biopsied skin samples, MP hydrolytic activity was significantly lower in sensitive than non-sensitive skin. Finally, we examined the activity of carboxylesterase (CES), which promptly hydrolyzes MP to PHBA. By using specific inhibitors of CES and CES2, we found that CES1 was responsible for MP metabolism. Our study suggests that low skin metabolism of topical agents is one of the causes of skin sensory irritation and resultant sensitive skin.

Topographic Mapping of the Primary Sensory Cortex Using Intraoperative Optical Imaging and Tactile Irritation.

The determination of exact tumor boundaries within eloquent brain regions is essential to maximize the extent of resection. Recent studies showed that intraoperative optical imaging (IOI) combined with median nerve stimulation is a helpful tool for visualization of the primary sensory cortex (PSC). In this technical note, we describe a novel approach of using IOI with painless tactile irritation to demonstrate the feasibility of topographic mapping of different body regions within the PSC. In addition, we compared the IOI results with preoperative functional MRI (fMRI) findings. In five patients with tumors located near the PSC who received tumor removal, IOI with tactile irritation of different body parts and fMRI was applied. We showed that tactile irritation of the hand in local and general anesthesia leads to reliable changes of cerebral blood volume during IOI. Hereby, we observed comparable IOI activation maps regarding the median nerve stimulation, fMRI and tactile irritation of the hand. The tactile irritation of different body areas revealed a plausible topographic distribution along the PSC. With this approach, IOI is also suitable for awake surgeries, since the tactile irritation is painless compared with median nerve stimulation and is congruent to fMRI findings. Further studies are ongoing to standardize this method to enable a broad application within the neurosurgical community.

Naphthalene: irritative and inflammatory effects on the airways.

OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional study determined whether acute sensory irritative or (sub)chronic inflammatory effects of the eyes, nose or respiratory tract are observed in employees who are exposed to naphthalene at the workplace. METHODS: Thirtynine healthy and non-smoking male employees with either moderate (n = 22) or high (n = 17) exposure to naphthalene were compared to 22 male employees from the same plants with no or only rare exposure to naphthalene. (Sub)clinical endpoint measures included nasal endoscopy, smell sensitivity, self-reported work-related complaints and the intensity of naphthalene odor and irritation. In addition, cellular and soluble mediators in blood, nasal lavage fluid (NALF) and induced sputum (IS) were analysed. All measurements were carried out pre-shift on Monday and post-shift on Thursday. Personal air monitoring revealed naphthalene shift concentrations up to 11.6 mg/m3 with short-term peak concentrations up to 145.8 mg/m3 and 1- and 2-naphthol levels (sum) in post-shift urine up to 10.1 mg/L. RESULTS: Acute sensory irritating effects at the eyes and upper airways were reported to occur when directly handling naphthalene (e.g., sieving pure naphthalene). Generally, naphthalene odor was described as intense and unpleasant. Habituation effects or olfactory fatigue were not observed. Endoscopic examination revealed mild inflammatory effects at the nasal mucosa of exposed employees in terms of reddening and swelling and abnormal mucus production. No consistent pattern of cellular and soluble mediators in blood, NALF or IS was observed which would indicate a chronic or acute inflammatory effect of naphthalene in exposed workers. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that exposure to naphthalene induces acute sensory irritative effects in exposed workers. No (sub)chronic inflammatory effects on the nasal epithelium or the respiratory tract could be observed under the study conditions described here.

Risk assessment for irritating chemicals - Derivation of extrapolation factors.

Irritation of the eyes and the upper respiratory tract are important endpoints for setting guide values for chemicals. To optimize the use of the often-limited data, we analysed controlled human exposure studies (CHS) with 1-4 h inhalation of the test substance, repeated dose inhalation studies in rodents, and Alarie-Tests and derived extrapolation factors (EF) for exposure duration, inter- and intraspecies differences. For the endpoint irritating effects in the respiratory tract in rodents, geometric mean (GM) values of 1.9 were obtained for the EF for subacute→subchronic (n = 16), 2.1 for subchronic→chronic (n = 40), and 2.9 for subacute→chronic (n = 10) extrapolation. Based on these data we suggest an EF of 2 for subchronic→chronic and of 4 for subacute→chronic extrapolation. In CHS, exposure concentration determines the effects rather than exposure duration. Slight reversible effects during 4 h exposure indicate that an EF of 1 can be considered for assessing chronic exposures. To assess species extrapolation, 10 chemicals were identified with both, reliable rat inhalation studies and CHS. The GM of the ratio between the No Observed Adverse Effect Concentration (NOAEC) in rats and humans was 2.3 and increased to 3.6 when expanding the dataset to all available EF (n = 25). Based on these analyses, an EF of 3 is suggested to extrapolate from a NOAEC in a chronic rat study to a NOAEC in a CHS. The analysis of EFs for the extrapolation from a 50% decrease in respiratory frequency in the Alarie test in mice (RD50) to a NOAEC in a CHS resulted in a GM of 40, for both, the reliable (n = 11) and the overall dataset (n = 19). We propose to use the RD50 from the Alarie test for setting guide values and to use 40 as EF. Efs for intraspecies differences in the human population must account for susceptible persons, most importantly for persons with chemical intolerance (CI), who show subjective signs of irritation at low concentrations. The limited data available do not justify to deviate from an EF of 10 - 20 as currently used in different regulatory settings.

Effect of dibenz(b,f)-1,4-oxazepine aerosol on the breathing pattern and respiratory variables by continuous recording and analysis in unanaesthetised mice.

A riot control agent has to be a sensory irritant of a reversible type without pulmonary irritation as the later can cause lung injury. The aim of the present study is to continuously record and analyse breathing pattern and respiratory variables of dibenz (b,f)-1,4-oxazepine (CR) in unanaesthetised mice during and after exposure. The lowest concentration of 0.65 mg/m3 did not produce any effect on the breathing pattern. As high as 500 fold increase (315.9 mg/m3) in the concentration was used and no mortality was observed. CR produced a concentration dependent sensory irritation, without pulmonary irritation or airflow obstruction, showing that it may not cause any lung injury. The sensory irritation was initiated within 5 min of exposure due to the activation of TRPA1 receptors of the upper respiratory tract. Immediate recovery of normal breath without sensory irritation was observed in all the concentrations except the highest concentration of 315.9 mg/m3. Corresponding to the sensory irritation there was concentration dependent respiratory depression. The 50 percent respiratory depression (RD50) in this experiment was 152 mg/m3 and the estimated threshold limit value for occupational exposure was 4.56 mg/m3. The present study shows that CR causes sensory irritation only which is completely recoverable.

Discrimination Between Atopic, Allergic, and Asthmatic Volunteers for Human Exposure Studies on Sensory Irritation.

Atopic, allergic, and especially asthmatic subjects might be particularly susceptible to sensory irritation induced by airborne chemicals compared to healthy individuals. Therefore, a good characterization of subjects is essential in inhalation exposure studies on sensory irritants. A total of 105 volunteers, 87% of whom reported to be non-allergic, participated in a medical examination that included skin prick test (SPT), measurements of total IgE, specific IgE (sIgE) to an ubiquitous allergen mix (sx1), and fractionated exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), as well as pulmonary function and methacholine test. The median value of sIgE to sx1 was 0.20 kU/L (0.07-91.3 kU/L) and correlated significantly with total IgE (28.8 kU/L (2-756 kU/L)) and FeNO (14 ppb (5-100 ppb)). Forty-three subjects (41%) had sIgE to sx1 ≥ 0.35 kU/L and were classified as atopic. Thirty-five subjects, all also sx1-positive, were positive in SPT. Obstruction, small airway disease, and/or bronchial hyperreactivity were diagnosed in 18 subjects. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) were performed to check whether signs of sensitization are useful to discriminate subjects with and without airway diseases. However, sx1, total IgE, FeNO, and SPT reached only low areas under the curve (AUC: 0.57-0.66). Although predominantly young and, according to their own statements, mostly non-allergic subjects participated in the study, almost half of them were atopic, and 10% had airway disease or bronchial hyperreactivity. This indicates that the validity of self-reported data might be inaccurate. In summary, diversified investigations of the allergy-related health status appear necessary for a thorough characterization of subjects for exposure studies on sensory irritants.

A short-term inhalation study to assess the reversibility of sensory irritation in human volunteers.

Sensory irritation is an acute adverse effect caused by chemicals that stimulate chemoreceptors of the upper respiratory tract or the mucous membranes of the outer eye. The avoidance of this end point is of uttermost importance in regulatory toxicology. In this study, repeated exposures to ethyl acrylate were analyzed to investigate possible carryover effects from day to day for different markers of sensory irritation. Thirty healthy subjects were exposed for 4 h on five subsequent days to ethyl acrylate at concentrations permitted by the German occupational exposure limit at the time of study. Ratings of eye irritation as well as eye blinking frequencies indicate the elicitation of sensory irritation. These markers of sensory irritation showed a distinct time course on every single day. However, cumulative carryover effects could not be identified across the week for any marker. The rhinological and biochemical markers could not reveal hints for more pronounced sensory irritation. Neither increased markers of neurogenic inflammation nor markers of immune response could be identified. Furthermore, the performance on neurobehavioral tests was not affected by ethyl acrylate and despite the strong odor of ethyl acrylate the participants improved their performances from day to day. While the affected physiological marker, the increased eye blinking frequency stays roughly on the same level across the week, subjective markers like perception of eye irritation decrease slightly from day to day though the temporal pattern of, i.e., eye irritation perception stays the same on each day. A hypothetical model of eye irritation time course derived from PK/PD modeling of the rabbit eye could explain the within-day time course of eye irritation ratings repeatedly found in this study more precisely.

How Healthy Is Healthy? Comparison Between Self-Reported Symptoms and Clinical Outcomes in Connection with the Enrollment of Volunteers for Human Exposure Studies on Sensory Irritation Effects.

Controlled human exposure studies on sensory irritation effects are usually performed with healthy volunteers. Therefore, in most studies pre-screening by a health questionnaire and a detailed medical examination are combined. The aim of this report is to investigate whether self-reported information about smoking and health status is sufficient or whether additional clinical tests are necessary for a successful and safe enrollment of healthy volunteers. There were 409 volunteers (55% female; 17-57 years; 79% non-smokers) who declared interest in participation in the study. However, 87 subjects failed to meet specific inclusion criteria, and further 138 had to be excluded due to the presence of chronic health problems. In effect, 184 subjects passed the initial questionnaire screening and proceed to further examination. Medical examination included electrocardiogram, blood and urine screening, and an olfactory function test. Atopy status was assessed by skin prick or specific IgE testing. Lung function and a methacholine challenge test were performed to assess respiratory health and bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Overall, only 107 non-smoking subjects (58% female; 19-40 years) who had no respiratory diseases, allergies, or chronic illnesses could be finally selected. Out of the 107 subjects, 8 were excluded due to positive cotinine tests, laboratory test results outside the reference range, or atypical ECGs. In another 12 subjects, obstruction or a bronchial hyperreactivity was diagnosed. Among the remaining 87 healthy subjects, 26 were classified as atopic and further two as hyposmic. In conclusion, although young and non-smoking volunteers considered themselves healthy by questionnaire, 20% showed signs of a heart, liver, or airway disease, and additional 24% were classified as atopics. This suggests that more detailed clinical testing may be necessary to safely exclude those who may adversely react to controlled exposure with sensory irritants.

Passive exposure of non-smokers to E-Cigarette aerosols: Sensory irritation, timing and association with volatile organic compounds.

AIM: The current study examined symptoms of irritation reported by non-smokers passively exposed to e-cigarette aerosols and their timing and association with the concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) produced. METHODS: 40 healthy non-smoking adults were exposed to e-cigarette aerosols for 30 min in a 35 m3 room. Second-hand e-cigarette aerosol (SHA) was produced by an experienced e-cigarette user using a standardized topography and two resistance settings (exposure 0.5 Ohm and 1.5 Ohm), in addition to a control session (no emissions). PM2.5 and PM1.0 were continuously measured over the duration of exposure, while Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) were recorded at 0, 15 and 30 min (t0, t15 and t30) of exposure. Each participant completed an irritation questionnaire at t0, t15, t30 of exposure and t60 (30 min post-exposure) on ocular, nasal, throat-respiratory symptoms of irritation and general complaints. Kruskal-Wallis H test for PM comparisons, repeated measures ANOVA for VOCs and Generalized Estimating Equations for symptoms of irritation and association with VOCs were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: 20 males and 20 females, with a mean age of 24.6 years (SD = 4.3) and exhaled CO < 7 ppm participated. PM concentrations in both experimental sessions were higher than the Control (p < 0.001). The most commonly reported symptoms were burning, dryness, sore throat, cough, breathlessness and headache. During both experimental sessions, ocular, nasal, throat-respiratory symptoms and general complaints increased significantly (p < 0.05). Ocular and nasal symptoms returned to baseline by t60 (p > 0.05) while throat-respiratory symptoms were still significantly higher at t60 (p = 0.044). VOCs were significantly associated with reported nasal and throat-respiratory symptoms in both experimental sessions (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A 30-min exposure to SHA provoked symptoms of sensory irritation and general complaints that lasted up to 30 min after the exposure and were positively associated with the concentrations of the VOC mixture emitted.

Online comment-based prediction of cosmetic ingredient's sensory irritation using gradient boosting algorithm.

BACKGROUND: The worldwide prevalence of "sensitive skin" group is estimated at being close to 40%. The main trigger for sensitive skin is the misuse of cosmetics products. Majority of the in vitro studies on cosmetic ingredients developed for topical application to the skin are not able to describe sensory irritation, such as stinging, burning, itching, and tingling. Besides, most of the in vivo tests often encounter problems such as limited number of subjects and usage scenarios deviate from reality. OBJECTIVE: A gradient boosting algorithm is adopted in our context to integrate multisource of information including skin types, sensory response, and cosmetics ingredients to predict sensory irritation. METHOD: In this study, online comments were preprocessed to construct a multi-dimensional structured data including skin types, sensory response, and cosmetics ingredients. A gradient boosting regression model was developed where sensory response was predicted based on the abovementioned structured input. The predictions were validated by in vivo test and were shown favorably when comparing with the state-of-the-art results from related works. RESULT: 46 007 samples were collected after data cleaning and were used in model developing. Results showed that the model was capable to predict the sensory response of 16 skin types to different ingredients (R = 0.71, P < 10-10 ). In addition, this model was validated using data from in vivo studies and presented a value of 75% on specificity, 88.9% on sensitivity, and 82.4% on accuracy. CONCLUSION: Our approach that is based on a variant of the gradient boosting algorithm provided an adequate solution for understanding the sensory irritation of cosmetic ingredients.

Ethyl acrylate: influence of sex or atopy on perceptual ratings and eye blink frequency.

Occupational exposure limits (OELs) are derived for protection from health hazards, assuming that exposed subjects are healthy adult workers. Whether differences in susceptibility to sensory irritation effects from airborne chemicals have to be taken into account is currently under discussion. Thus, we chose atopics as a healthy but possibly susceptible subpopulation that can be identified with a clinical test. To investigate the influence of sex or atopy on sensitivity to airborne chemicals, 22 subjects were exposed for 4 h to ethyl acrylate at three concentrations: 0.05 ppm (odor threshold; sham), 5 ppm (constant), and varying exposure between 0 and 10 ppm. Odor intensity decreased and eye irritation ratings increased in a dose-dependent manner, reflecting the time course of the exposure scenarios. The reports of moderate-to-strong eye irritation were verified by significant increases in eye blink frequency. Our results show that women reported subjective eye irritation to an increasing degree. However, these sex-related differences in ratings could not be verified by objective assessment of eye blink frequency. Atopic subjects reported higher odor intensity than non-atopic subjects, but only during the sham (odorous but not irritating) exposure condition. Differences in ratings on annoyance, and eye or nose irritation were not found. Furthermore, the study revealed that atopic subjects might belong to a group of subjects with frequent eye blink activity. Although the relative increase in blink rates was more pronounced in non-atopic subjects, atopic subjects had significant higher blink rates at the end of the exposure to varying ethyl acrylate concentrations. Our results do not support that atopy enhances chemosensory effects if only the increase of blink rates and not the absolute height are considered as adverse effect. Nevertheless, the results indicate that individuals with frequent eye blink activity should be distinguished from those with normal eye blink activity while investigating blink rates as objective parameter of eye irritation.

Concentration × time analyses of sensory irritants revisited: Weight of evidence or the toxic load approach. That is the question.

The toxic effects resulting from inhalation exposure depend on both the concentration (C) of the inhaled substance and the exposure duration (t), including the assumptions that the exposure-limiting toxic effect is linearly linked with the accumulated C × t (inhaled dose), and detoxification or compensatory responses diminishing this dose are negligible. This interrelationship applies for both constant and fluctuating concentrations and is usually expressed by the toxic load equation Cn × t = constant effect (k). The toxic load exponent 'n' is derived from both C- and t-dependent exponents with Cb2×tb3 = k with n = b2/b3. This model is taken as a fundamental basis for assessing the acute hazard posed by atmospheric releases of noxious substances, whether deliberate or accidental. Despite its universal use, especially for inhaled irritants, the toxicological significance of this mathematical construct is still discussed controversially. With n = 1 this equation is called Haber's rule. The underlying assumption is that the exposure-based calculated and the actually inhaled Cb2×tb3 are identical. Unlike the calculated dose, the latter is dependent on the test species and its t-dependent change in respiratory minute volume (MV). The retention patterns of inhaled irritant vapors may differ in obligate nasal breathing rodents and oronasally breathing humans as well. Thus, due to the interdependence of n on both C, t and k, this mathematical construct generates a bioassay-specific 'n' which can hardly be considered as human-equivalent, especially following exposure to sensory irritants known to elicit reflex-related changes in MV. The C- and t-dependent impact on Cn × t = k was analyzed with the sensory irritant n-butyl monoisocyanate and compared with t-dependent changes elicited by highly, moderately, and poorly water-soluble sensory irritants ammonia, toluene diisocyanate, and phosgene, respectively. This comparison reveals that n depends on several factors: In cases where MV is instantly and plateau-like depressed with onset of exposure, n appears to be most dependent on Cb2 × MV whereas for a similar slower time-dependent response n becomes more dependent on MV × tb3. For any ensuing risk characterization that focuses on acute non-lethal threshold Cb2 × tb3's, the sensory irritation-related depression in MV must be known to arrive at meaningful conclusions. In summary, both Cn- and t-dependent dosimetry-related pitfalls may occur in acute bioassays on rodents following inhalation exposure to irritants. These must be identified and dealt with judiciously prior to translation to apparently similar human exposures. By default, extrapolations from one duration to another should start with that Cn × t eliciting the least depression in MV with n = 1.

Sensory irritation of vapours of formic, acetic, propionic and butyric acid.

In mice, inhalation of formic, acetic, propionic and butyric acid caused a rapid decrease in the respiratory rate, which decreased to a stable level during the remaining part of the 30 min exposure period; this was due to sensory irritation. The concentration decreasing the respiratory rate (RD) by 50% (RD50) was 438, 308, 386 and 285 ppm, respectively, which allowed an adequate prediction of the Threshold Limit Values. In mice inhaling through a tracheal cannula, bypassing the trigeminal nerves, caused a slower decrease in respiratory rate due to pulmonary irritation. In the low concentration range, the pulmonary irritation response was less pronounced than the sensory irritation response. As the response in the normal (non-cannulated) mice was not influenced by pulmonary irritation, sensory irritation is the key effect, presumably due to the scrubbing effect of the upper airways, preventing access to the lungs. The activated receptors were in a non-lipophilic (hydrophilic) environment, from where the receptors may be activated by means of liberated protons. At the RD0, formic acid may, at least partly, activates ASIC, TRPV1 and TRPA1 receptors, whereas acetic, propionic and butyric acid may activate ASIC and TRPA1 receptors, based on the estimated pH in the mucus layer.

Indoor air humidity, air quality, and health - An overview.

There is a long-standing dispute about indoor air humidity and perceived indoor air quality (IAQ) and associated health effects. Complaints about sensory irritation in eyes and upper airways are generally among top-two symptoms together with the perception "dry air" in office environments. This calls for an integrated analysis of indoor air humidity and eye and airway health effects. This overview has reviewed the literature about the effects of extended exposure to low humidity on perceived IAQ, sensory irritation symptoms in eyes and airways, work performance, sleep quality, virus survival, and voice disruption. Elevation of the indoor air humidity may positively impact perceived IAQ, eye symptomatology, and possibly work performance in the office environment; however, mice inhalation studies do not show exacerbation of sensory irritation in the airways by low humidity. Elevated humidified indoor air appears to reduce nasal symptoms in patients suffering from obstructive apnea syndrome, while no clear improvement on voice production has been identified, except for those with vocal fatigue. Both low and high RH, and perhaps even better absolute humidity (water vapor), favors transmission and survival of influenza virus in many studies, but the relationship between temperature, humidity, and the virus and aerosol dynamics is complex, which in the end depends on the individual virus type and its physical/chemical properties. Dry and humid air perception continues to be reported in offices and in residential areas, despite the IAQ parameter "dry air" (or "wet/humid air") is semantically misleading, because a sensory organ for humidity is non-existing in humans. This IAQ parameter appears to reflect different perceptions among other odor, dustiness, and possibly exacerbated by desiccation effect of low air humidity. It is salient to distinguish between indoor air humidity (relative or absolute) near the breathing and ocular zone and phenomena caused by moisture-damage of the building construction and emissions therefrom. Further, residential versus public environments should be considered as separate entities with different characteristics and demands of humidity. Research is needed about particle, bacteria and virus dynamics indoors for improvement of quality of life and with more focus on the impact of absolute humidity. "Dry (or wet) air" should be redefined to become a meaningful IAQ descriptor.

Evaluation of airborne sensory irritants for setting exposure limits or guidelines: A systematic approach.

Sensory irritation of eyes and upper airways is an important endpoint for setting occupational exposure limits (OELs) and indoor air guidelines. Sensory irritants cause a painful burning, stinging and itching sensation. Controlled chamber studies are the "golden standard" for evaluations. Well conducted workplace studies offer another possibility. For generalization, the number of participants and their age, smoking, gender, and prior exposure, experience and mood has to be considered. Exposure assessments have to be reliable and exposure duration sufficiently long to establish time-response relationships. A potential confounding by odour has to be assessed. For workplace exposures, mixed exposure and healthy worker effects have to be evaluated. The "Alarie test" is the only validated animal bioassay for prediction of sensory irritation in humans. The mouse bioassay uses the trigeminal reflex-induced decrease in the respiratory rate. The 50% decrease (RD50) has been correlated with OELs set for sensory irritants; predicted OELs for sensory irritants are 0.03xRD50. Evaluation of the bioassay comprises the number of mice and the strain, the reliability of the exposure concentrations and exposure-response relationships, and the similar mode-of-action in mice and humans. These approaches can be used for quality assurance of reported data to set air quality guidelines.

Prediction of human sensory irritation due to ethyl acrylate: the appropriateness of time-weighted average concentration × time models for varying concentrations.

Human data about the potency of ethyl acrylate to evoke sensory irritation is currently not available. Therefore, we conducted an experimental exposure study and the magnitude of chemosensory effects in healthy human volunteers was mathematically modeled by combining the factors current concentration (c) and duration/time (t). In a repeated-measures design, 19 subjects were exposed for 4 h to constant and varying concentrations (including peaks of 5 and 10 ppm) of ethyl acrylate with either a 2.5 or 5 ppm time-weighted average (TWA) concentration. Clean air served as control condition. Nasal lavage fluid, eye blinking frequencies, and rhinomanometry were used as physiological measures of sensory irritation. Several subjective ratings assessed olfactory and trigeminal perceptions. The blinking frequency was significantly increased during the varying 5 ppm condition. Regardless of the TWA concentration, varying exposures caused stronger effects than constant exposures. Our mathematical modeling showed that olfactory perceptions generally decreased over time while ratings of eye irritation increased over time even under the constant 5 ppm condition. Including the current concentration in the mathematical modeling always increased the goodness of fit substantially. The results showed that the intensity of sensory irritation could be predicted best with a complex c × t model. During the 2.5 ppm conditions, only the current concentration predicted the ratings and time-dependent processes could not be observed. However, in both 5 ppm TWA conditions strong eye irritations and increased blinking frequency, only at the end of the 4-h exposures a dose-dependency of these adverse effects was clearly shown.

Effects by inhalation of abundant fragrances in indoor air - An overview.

Odorous compounds (odors) like fragrances may cause adverse health effects. To assess their importance by inhalation, we have reviewed how the four major abundant and common airborne fragrances (α-pinene (APN), limonene (LIM), linalool (LIL), and eugenol (EUG)) impact the perceived indoor air quality as odor annoyance, sensory irritation and sensitization in the airways. Breathing and cardiovascular effects, and work performance, and the impact in the airways of ozone-initiated gas- and particle phase reactions products have also been assessed. Measured maximum indoor concentrations for APN, LIM and LIL are close to or above their odor thresholds, but far below their thresholds for sensory irritation in the eyes and upper airways; no information could be traced for EUG. Likewise, reported risk values for long-term effects are far above reported indoor concentrations. Human exposure studies with mixtures of APN and LIM and supported by animal inhalation models do not support sensitization of the airways at indoor levels by inhalation that include other selected fragrances. Human exposure studies, in general, indicate that reported lung function effects are likely due to the perception rather than toxic effects of the fragrances. In general, effects on the breathing rate and mood by exposure to the fragrances are inconclusive. The fragrances may increase the high-frequency heart rate variability, but aerosol exposure during cleaning activities may result in a reduction. Distractive effects influencing the work performance by fragrance/odor exposure are consistently reported, but their persistence over time is unknown. Mice inhalation studies indicate that LIM or its reaction mixture may possess anti-inflammatory properties. There is insufficient information that ozone-initiated reactions with APN or LIM at typical indoor levels cause airway effects in humans. Limited experimental information is available on long-term effects of ozone-initiated reaction products of APN and LIM at typical indoor levels.