Assessing cancer hazards of bitumen emissions - a case study for complex petroleum substances.

When assessing cancer hazard and risk associated with a complex petroleum substance, like bitumen emissions, there are often conflicting results related to human, animal and mechanistic studies. Validation of the complex composition to assure that it matches real-world exposures and control of confounders are pivotal factors in study design to allow the necessary read-across during assessments. Several key studies on bitumen emissions in two-year dermal cancer assays reported variable outcomes ranging from high cancer incidence to no cancer incidence. Here, we synthesize findings from published studies to explain the differences and discuss critical factors in cancer hazard evaluation for complex petroleum substances. Using these critical factors, we reviewed relevant human genetic toxicity, mammalian toxicity and mechanistic studies with bitumen to understand the divergence in results. We assess the most reliable and scientifically supported information on the potential carcinogenic hazards of bitumen emissions and comment on quality and completeness of data. Human hazard data are typically considered highest priority because they eliminate the need for interspecies extrapolation and reduce the range of high -to low-dose extrapolation during the risk assessment process. Finally, two well-conducted comprehensive animal studies are discussed that have well-defined test material, exposure concentration and composition representative of worker exposure, evidence of systemic uptake, no confounding exposures and provide consistency across all elements within both studies. Studies that allow effective read-across from human, animal and mechanistic components, control for confounders and are well-validated analytically against workplace exposures, provide the strongest evidence base for evaluating cancer hazard.

A consistent and transparent approach for calculation of Derived No-Effect Levels (DNELs) for petroleum substances.

The REACH legislation introduced Derived No-Effect Levels (DNELs) which are defined as 'the levels of exposure above which humans should not be exposed'. DNELs were required for several categories of petroleum substances and CONCAWE developed a consistent approach for their derivation. First, the No-Observed Effect Level from a relevant study was corrected for pattern and route of exposure to obtain a modified Point-of-Departure (POD(modified)). Subsequently, the DNEL was calculated by dividing the POD(modified) by Assessment Factors (AFs) to adjust for inter- and intraspecies differences. If substance-specific information allowed, Informed Assessment Factors (IAFs), developed by CONCAWE were utilised. When little or no substance-specific information on those differences was known, default AFs from the guidance provided by ECHA were used. Some hazard endpoints did not lend themselves to calculation of DNELs (e.g. aspiration, dermal irritation, mutagenicity). DNEL calculation was considered not appropriate if adverse effects were not observed in tests conducted at a limit dose or if meaningful dose-response curves could not be developed. However, DNELs were calculated when hazards were identified, regardless of whether or not risk characterisation was required under REACH. Examples for gasoline, Lubricating Base Oils, gas oils and bitumen are provided to illustrate CONCAWE's approach.

European hazard classification advice for crude oil-derived lubricant base oils compared with the proposed mineral oil mist TLV.

The notice of intended change for the threshold limit value (TLV) for mineral oil mist contains a notation for human carcinogenicity. A description is provided of the current European regulatory approach used to distinguish between carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic mineral base oils on the basis of oil refining process and chemical marker information. This approach has proven effective in creating a market situation in the countries of the European Union where many customers require severely refined, non-carcinogenic oils. It is recommended that ACGIH consolidate the distinction between poorly and severely refined base oils in the recommended TLV for mineral oil mist and use different toxicological considerations to derive exposure control guidelines.