Industry-wide review of potential worker exposure to 1,3-butadiene during chemical manufacturing and processing as a reactant.

Among the first 20 high-priority chemical substances selected by USEPA to undergo risk evaluation as part of the Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act of 2016 is 1,3-butadiene (1,3-BD). Because much of the literature related to occupational exposure to 1,3-BD is associated with the use of the substance in synthetic rubber production and few data have been published for exposures to 1,3-BD manufacturing workers, existing industrial hygiene data collected at facilities where the substance is manufactured or processed as a reactant were compiled and analyzed. The dataset was comprised of personal air samples collected between 2010 and 2019 at facilities located throughout the United States and was compiled into a single database using a uniform data collection template. Data designated by the companies as full-shift were stratified by job group and one of three operational conditions of the workplace: routine, turnaround, and non-routine. Data designated by the companies as short-term and task-level were stratified by task description, sample duration, and operational condition. The final aggregated database contained a total of 5,676 full-shift personal samples. Mean concentrations of 1,3-BD for the job groups ranged from 0.012 ppm to 0.16 ppm. High-end estimates of 1,3-BD air concentrations for the job groups under routine operations ranged from 0.014 ppm to 0.23 ppm. The aggregated database also included 1,063 short-term and task-level personal samples. For short-term samples (< =15 min), mean concentrations ranged from 0.49 ppm to 3.9 ppm, with the highest concentrations observed for the cleaning and maintaining equipment tasks. For task samples with durations greater than 15 min, mean concentrations ranged from 0.49 to 3.6 ppm, with the highest concentrations observed for the unloading and loading task. In addition to the personal air sampling records, information on the use of PPE during various tasks was compiled and analyzed. This data set provides robust quantitative air concentration data and exposure control information for which occupational exposures to 1,3-BD in the Manufacturing and Processing as a Reactant condition of use can be assessed.

A reproductive and developmental toxicity screening study of 1,3-butadiene in Sprague-Dawley rats.

1,3 Butadiene (BD) is an industrial intermediate used primarily in product manufacturing with the greatest exposure potential via inhalation. BD was evaluated for reproductive and developmental effects in a Good Laboratory Practice (GLP)-compliant, extended OECD 421 guideline study (completed 2003). Twelve-week old rats (12/sex/dose) were exposed via whole-body inhalation to BD vapor (0, 300, 1500, 6000 ppm) for 6 h/day, 7 days/week, starting 14 days prior to mating through the day prior to euthanasia (total exposures: 83-84 days for F0 males 60-70 days for F0 females). Select F1 offspring (1/sex/litter) were dosed 7 days (postnatal days 21-27 or 28-34), then necropsied. At 1500 and 6000 ppm, treatment-related facial soiling was seen in F0 males and females with decreased body weights/gains in F0 males. F1 males and females exhibited similar effects at 1500 and 6000 ppm. Importantly, the F0 generation had no evidence of altered sperm production, testicular effects, or ovarian atrophy, which were sensitive responses in mice. The no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) is 300 ppm due to decreased body weight/gain and facial soiling at 1500 ppm, whereas 6000 ppm serves as a NOAEL for reproductive and developmental endpoints. This study contributes to the weight-of-evidence of differential BD reproductive toxicity in rats and mice.

Facilitation of risk assessment with evidence-based methods - A framework for use of systematic mapping and systematic reviews in determining hazard, developing toxicity values, and characterizing uncertainty.

Systematic review tools and approaches developed for clinical medicine are often difficult to apply "off the shelf" in order to meet the needs of chemical risk assessments. To address such, we propose an approach that can be used by practitioners for using evidence-based methods to facilitate the risk assessment process. The framework builds on and combines efforts conducted to date by a number of agencies and researchers; the novelty is in combining these efforts with a practical understanding of risk assessment, and translating such into a 'step-by-step' guide. The approach relies on three key components: problem formulation, systematic evidence mapping, and systematic review, applied using a stepwise approach. Unique to this framework is the consideration of exposure in selecting, prioritizing, and evaluating data (e.g., dose-relevance, routes of exposure, etc.). Using the proposed step-by-step process, critical appraisal of individual studies (e.g., formal and structured assessment of both relevance and reliability) and integration efforts are considered in context of specified risk assessment objectives (e.g., mode of action, dose-response) as well as chemical-specific considerations. The resulting framework provides a logical approach of how evidence-based methods can be used to facilitate risk assessment, and elevates the use of systematic methods beyond hazard identification to directly facilitating transparent and objective selection of candidate studies and/or datasets used to quantitatively characterize risk, and to better use the underlying process to inform the approaches used to develop toxicity values.

Recommendations for further revisions to improve the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monograph program.

In 2019, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) "Preamble to the IARC Monographs" expanded guidance regarding the scientific approaches that should be employed in its monographs. These amendments to the monograph development process are an improvement but still fall short in several areas. While the revised Preamble lays out broad methods and approaches to evaluate scientific evidence, there is a lack of specificity with regard to how IARC Working Groups will conduct consistent evaluations in a standardized, objective, and transparent manner; document systematic review and evidence integration actions, and substantiate how these actions and decisions inform the ultimate classifications. Furthermore, no guidance is provided to ensure Working Groups consistently incorporate mechanistic evidence in a robust manner using a defined approach in the context of 21st century knowledge of modes of action. Nor are the conclusions of the working groups subjected to outside, independent scientific peer review. Continued improvements and modernization of the procedures for evaluating, presenting, and communicating study quality, and in the methods used to conduct and peer-review evidence-based decision making will benefit the Working Group members, the IARC Monographs Programme overall, and the international regulatory community and public who rely upon the monographs.

Improving risk assessment approaches for chemicals with both endogenous and exogenous exposures.

To conduct risk assessments of exogenous chemicals for which there are also endogenous exposures, knowledge of the chemistry and biology of both types of exposures needs to be integrated into problem formulation and carried through to risk characterization. This issue is framed in a risk assessment context, highlighting the importance of quantifying increments of dose from all sources of the same or similar chemicals interacting with biological targets; understanding the influence of endogenous chemical concentrations on disease risk; and assessing total dose to targets in evaluating risk from incremental environmental exposures. Examples of recent assessments illustrate the importance of addressing this issue. Evaluations of data on blood or organ concentrations of ammonia, methanol, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and three gaseous signaling molecules (hydrogen sulfide, carbon monoxide, and nitric oxide) provide examples where current data are already informing perspectives on relative exposures at the portal of entry and systemically. To facilitate quality risk assessments of exogenous chemicals with endogenous exposures, a series of specific questions are presented that need to be addressed in systematic review to enhance problem formulation, improve the development of holistic conceptual models, and to facilitate the identification of priority data needs for improving risk assessments.

Derivation of a no-significant-risk-level for tetrabromobisphenol A based on a threshold non-mutagenic cancer mode of action.

A no-significant-risk-level of 20 mg day-1 was derived for tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA). Uterine tumors (adenomas, adenocarcinomas, and malignant mixed Müllerian) observed in female Wistar Han rats from a National Toxicology Program 2-year cancer bioassay were identified as the critical effect. Studies suggest that TBBPA is acting through a non-mutagenic mode of action. Thus, the most appropriate approach to derivation of a cancer risk value based on US Environmental Protection Agency guidelines is a threshold approach, akin to a cancer safe dose (RfDcancer ). Using the National Toxicology Program data, we utilized Benchmark dose software to derive a benchmark dose lower limit (BMDL10 ) as the point of departure (POD) of 103 mg kg-1  day-1 . The POD was adjusted to a human equivalent dose of 25.6 mg kg-1  day-1 using allometric scaling. We applied a composite adjustment factor of 100 to the POD to derive an RfDcancer of 0.26 mg kg-1  day-1 . Based on a human body weight of 70 kg, the RfDcancer was adjusted to a no-significant-risk-level of 20 mg day-1 . This was compared to other available non-cancer and cancer risk values, and aligns well with our understanding of the underlying biology based on the toxicology data. Overall, the weight of evidence from animal studies indicates that TBBPA has low toxicity and suggests that high doses over long exposure durations are needed to induce uterine tumor formation. Future research needs include a thorough and detailed vetting of the proposed adverse outcome pathway, including further support for key events leading to uterine tumor formation and a quantitative weight of evidence analysis.

Development of an inhalation unit risk factor for hexavalent chromium.

A unit risk factor (URF) was developed for hexavalent chromium (CrVI). The URF is based on excess lung cancer mortality in two key epidemiological studies of chromate production workers. The Crump et al. (2003) study concerns the Painesville, OH worker cohort, while Gibb et al. (2000) regards the Baltimore, MD cohort. A supporting assessment was also performed for a cohort from four low-dose chromate plants (Leverkusen and Uerdingen, Germany, Corpus Christi, TX, Castle Hayne, NC). For the Crump et al. (2003) study, grouped observed and expected number of lung cancer mortalities along with cumulative CrVI exposures were used to obtain the maximum likelihood estimate and asymptotic variance of the slope (ß) for the linear multiplicative relative risk model using Poisson regression modeling. For the Gibb et al. (2000) study, Cox proportional hazards modeling was performed with optimal exposure lag and adjusting for the effect of covariates (e.g., smoking) to estimate ß values. Life-table analyses were used to develop URFs for each of the two key studies, as well as for supporting and related studies. The two key study URFs were combined using weighting factors relevant to confidence to derive the final URF for CrVI of 2.3E-03 per µgCrVI/m(3).

Development of a cancer-based chronic inhalation reference value for hexavalent chromium based on a nonlinear-threshold carcinogenic assessment.

The carcinogenicity of hexavalent chromium(CrVI) is of significant interest to regulatory agencies for the protection of public health and to industry. Additionally, the mode of action (MOA) and conditions under which CrVI may induce carcinogenicity (e.g., reductive capacity considerations) have recently been the subject of significant scientific debate. Epidemiological data supported by data relevant to the carcinogenic MOA support considering nonlinear-threshold carcinogenic assessments for comparison to default linear low-dose extrapolation approaches. This study reviews epidemiological studies available in the scientific literature and conducts additional statistical dose-response analyses to identify potential carcinogenic thresholds and points of departure (PODs) in the context of supportive MOA information for a nonlinear-threshold inhalation carcinogenic assessment. Dosimetric adjustments and application of appropriate uncertainty factors (total UF of 30) to the selected cumulative exposure POD results in a cancer-based chronic inhalation reference value (ReV) of 0.24 µgCrVI/m(3). This chronic ReV is 300 times higher than the 1 in 100,000 excess cancer risk air concentration of 8E-04 µg/m(3) based on USEPA's unit risk factor.

An updated inhalation unit risk factor for arsenic and inorganic arsenic compounds based on a combined analysis of epidemiology studies.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) developed an inhalation unit risk factor (URF) of 4.3E-03 per µg/m(3) for arsenic in 1984 for excess lung cancer mortality based on epidemiological studies of workers at two smelters: the Asarco smelter in Tacoma, Washington and the Anaconda smelter in Montana. Since the USEPA assessment, new studies have been published and exposure estimates were updated at the Asarco and Anaconda smelters and additional years of follow-up evaluated. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has developed an inhalation URF for lung cancer mortality from exposures to arsenic and inorganic arsenic compounds based on a newer epidemiology study of Swedish workers and the updates of the Asarco and Anaconda epidemiology studies. Using a combined analysis approach, the TCEQ weighted the individual URFs from these three epidemiology cohort studies, to calculate a final inhalation URF of 1.5E-04 per µg/m(3). In addition, the TCEQ also conducted a sensitivity analysis, in which they calculated a URF based on a type of meta-analysis, and these results compared well with the results of the combined analysis. The no significant concentration level (i.e., air concentration at 1 in 100,000 excess lung cancer mortality) is 0.067µg/m(3). This value will be used to evaluate ambient air monitoring data so the general public in Texas is protected against adverse health effects from chronic exposure to arsenic.

Approaches for describing and communicating overall uncertainty in toxicity characterizations: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) as a case study.

Single point estimates of human health hazard/toxicity values such as a reference dose (RfD) are generally used in chemical hazard and risk assessment programs for assessing potential risks associated with site- or use-specific exposures. The resulting point estimates are often used by risk managers for regulatory decision-making, including standard setting, determination of emission controls, and mitigation of exposures to chemical substances. Risk managers, as well as stakeholders (interested and affected parties), often have limited information regarding assumptions and uncertainty factors in numerical estimates of both hazards and risks. Further, the use of different approaches for addressing uncertainty, which vary in transparency, can lead to a lack of confidence in the scientific underpinning of regulatory decision-making. The overarching goal of this paper, which was developed from an invited participant workshop, is to offer five approaches for presenting toxicity values in a transparent manner in order to improve the understanding, consideration, and informed use of uncertainty by risk assessors, risk managers, and stakeholders. The five approaches for improving the presentation and communication of uncertainty are described using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) as a case study. These approaches will ensure transparency in the documentation, development, and use of toxicity values at EPA, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), and other similar assessment programs in the public and private sector. Further empirical testing will help to inform the approaches that will work best for specific audiences and situations.

Health- and vegetative-based effect screening values for ethylene.

Ethylene (ET) is ubiquitous in the environment and is produced both naturally and due to anthropogenic sources. Interestingly, the majority of ambient ET contribution is from natural sources and anthropogenic sources contribute only a minor portion. While microbes and plants naturally produce a large amount of ET, mammals are reported to produce only a small amount of ET endogenously. Anthropogenic sources of ET include the combustion of gas, fuel, coal and biomass. ET is also widely used as an intermediate to make other chemicals and products and is also used for controlled ripening of fruits and vegetables. Although, a review of human and laboratory animal studies indicate ET to be relatively non-toxic, there is concern about the potential toxicity of ET because ET is metabolically converted to ethylene oxide (EtO). EtO has been classified to be carcinogenic to human by the inhalation route by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) cancer. ET, however, has been classified as a Group 3 chemical which indicates it is not classified as a human carcinogen by IARC. Several studies have reported ET to cause adverse effects to plant species (vegetation effects) at concentrations that are not adverse to humans. Therefore, the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) conducted detailed health and welfare (odor and vegetation) based assessments of ET to develop both health and vegetative based toxicity factors in 2008 in accordance with TCEQ guidelines. The health assessment based on well-conducted animal toxicity studies resulted in identification of higher points of departures and subsequently higher effect screening levels (ESLs) that were more than a magnitude higher than the threshold adverse effect level for vegetative effects for ET. Further, based on a weight-of-evidence evaluation of potential mutagenic and carcinogenic mode-of-actions for ET it appears the metabolic conversion of ET to EtO is of insufficient magnitude to cause concern of potential cancer risk. Therefore, the short-term ESL for air permit reviews and air monitoring evaluations is the vegetation-based ESL of 1200 ppb as it is more than a magnitude lower than the health-based acute ESL of 150,000 ppb. Similar to the acute derivation, the chronic evaluation resulted in the derivation of a chronic vegetation based ESL of 30 ppb that was much lower than the chronic ESL of 1600 ppb. In summary, the TCEQ's acute and chronic ESLs for vegetation will protect the general public from short-term and long-term adverse health and welfare effects. The general public includes children, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with pre-existing health conditions.

Evaluation of acute inhalation toxicity for chemicals with limited toxicity information.

A large reference database consisting of acute inhalation no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs) and acute lethality data for 97 chemicals was compiled to investigate two methods to derive health-protective concentrations for chemicals with limited toxicity data for the evaluation of one-hour intermittent inhalation exposure. One method is to determine threshold of concern (TOC) concentrations for acute toxicity potency categories and the other is to determine NOAEL-to-LC(50) ratios. In the TOC approach, 97 chemicals were classified based on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals proposed by the United Nations into different acute toxicity categories (from most toxic to least toxic): Category 1, Category 2, Category 3, Category 4, and Category 5. The tenth percentile of the cumulative percentage distribution of NOAELs in each category was determined and divided by an uncertainty factor of 100 to derive the following health-protective TOC concentrations: 4microg/m(3) for chemicals classified in Category 1; 20microg/m(3) for Category 2; 125microg/m(3) for both Categories 3 and 4; and 1000microg/m(3) for Category 5. For the NOAEL-to-LC(50) ratio approach, 55 chemicals with NOAEL exposure durations < or = 24 hour were used to calculate NOAEL-to-LC(50) ratios. The tenth percentile of the cumulative percentage distribution of the ratios was calculated and divided by an uncertainty factor of 100 to produce a composite factor equal to 8.3x10(-5). For a chemical with limited toxicity information, this composite factor is multiplied by a 4-hour LC(50) value or other appropriate acute lethality data. Both approaches can be used to produce an estimate of a conservative threshold air concentration below which no appreciable risk to the general population would be expected to occur after a one-hour intermittent exposure.