An updated evaluation of reported no-observed adverse effect levels for chrysotile, amosite, and crocidolite asbestos for lung cancer and mesothelioma.

This analysis updates two previous analyses that evaluated the exposure-response relationships for lung cancer and mesothelioma in chrysotile-exposed cohorts. We reviewed recently published studies, as well as updated information from previous studies. Based on the 16 studies considered for chrysotile (<10% amphibole), we identified the "no-observed adverse effect level" (NOAEL) for lung cancer and/or mesothelioma; it should be noted that smoking or previous or concurrent occupational exposure to amphiboles (if it existed) was not controlled for. NOAEL values ranged from 2.3-<11.5 f/cc-years to 1600-3200 f/cc-years for lung cancer and from 100-<400 f/cc-years to 800-1599 f/cc-years for mesothelioma. The range of best-estimate NOAELs was estimated to be 97-175 f/cc-years for lung cancer and 250-379 f/cc-years for mesothelioma. None of the six cohorts of cement or friction product manufacturing workers exhibited an increased risk at any exposure level, while all but one of the six studies of textile workers reported an increased risk at one or more exposure levels. This is likely because friction and cement workers were exposed to much shorter chrysotile fibers. Only eight cases of peritoneal mesothelioma were reported in all studies on predominantly chrysotile-exposed cohorts combined. This analysis also proposed best-estimate amosite and crocidolite NOAELs for mesothelioma derived by the application of relative potency estimates to the best-estimate chrysotile NOAELs for mesothelioma and validated by epidemiology studies with exposure-response information. The best-estimate amosite and crocidolite NOAELs for mesothelioma were 2-5 f/cc-years and 0.6-1 f/cc-years, respectively. The rate of peritoneal mesothelioma in amosite- and crocidolite-exposed cohorts was between approximately 70- to 100-fold and several-hundred-fold higher than in chrysotile-exposed cohorts, respectively. These findings will help characterize potential worker and consumer health risks associated with historical and current chrysotile, amosite, and crocidolite exposures.

Occupational exposure to cosmetic talc and mesothelioma in barbers, hairdressers, and cosmetologists: A systematic review of the epidemiology.

Inhalation exposure to cosmetic talc has generated much scientific debate regarding its potential as a risk factor for mesothelioma, a rare, but fatal cancer. Barbers, hairdressers, and cosmetologists have regularly used cosmetic talc-containing products, but the collective epidemiological evidence for mesothelioma in these occupations has yet to be described. As such, we conducted a systematic review of PubMed and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's (NIOSH) Numbered Publications list to identify original epidemiological literature reporting measures of association between these occupations and incidence of or death from mesothelioma. Literature screening was performed independently twice, the results of which were summarized and tabulated and underwent a review for their accuracy. A total of 12 studies met our inclusion criteria, including three cohort, six case-control, and three proportionate mortality/registration studies. The data from these studies were collected in 13 European and North American countries, spanning more than 50 years. We supplemented this review with queries of occupational mortality databases that are managed by the Washington State Department of Health and NIOSH for 26 U.S. states. Most findings were null and if statistically significant, nearly all showed an inverse relationship, indicative of a protective effect of these occupations on mesothelioma risk. Overall, the epidemiological evidence does not support an increased risk of mesothelioma for these occupations. This research fills an important data gap on the etiology of mesothelioma in barbers, hairdressers, and cosmetologists, and provides a benchmark for those with comparatively less exposure, such as non-occupational users of similar cosmetic talc-containing products.

Systematic review of the human health hazards of propylene dichloride.

Propylene dichloride (PDC) is a chlorinated substance used primarily as an intermediate in basic organic chemical manufacturing. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently evaluating PDC as a high-priority substance under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). We conducted a systematic review of the non-cancer and cancer hazards of PDC using the EPA TSCA and Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) frameworks. We identified 12 epidemiological, 16 toxicokinetic, 34 experimental animal, and 49 mechanistic studies. Point-of-contact respiratory effects are the most sensitive non-cancer effects after inhalation exposure, and PDC is neither a reproductive nor a developmental toxicant. PDC is not mutagenic in vivo, and while in vitro evidence is mixed, DNA strand breaks consistently occur. Nasal tumors in rats and lung tumors in mice occurred after lifetime high-level inhalation exposure. Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) was observed in Japanese print workers exposed to high concentrations of PDC. However, co-exposures, as well as liver parasites, hepatitis, and other risk factors, may also have contributed. The cancer mode of action (MOA) analysis revealed that PDC may act through multiple biological pathways occurring sequentially and/or simultaneously, although chronic tissue damage and inflammation likely dominate. Critically, health benchmarks protective of non-cancer effects are expected to protect against cancer in humans.

Derivation of an occupational exposure limit for diacetyl using dose-response data from a chronic animal inhalation exposure study.

Occupational exposure limits (OELs) have been previously proposed for diacetyl; however, most of these values are based on worker cohort studies that are known to have several limitations and confounders. In this analysis, an 8 hour time-weighted average (TWA) OEL for diacetyl was derived based on data from a chronic, 2 year animal inhalation study recently released by the US National Toxicology Program. In that study, complete histopathology was conducted on male and female mice and rats exposed to 0, 12.5, 25 or 50 ppm diacetyl. Several responses in the lower respiratory tract of rats (the more sensitive species) were chosen as the critical endpoints of interest. Benchmark concentration (BMC) modeling of these endpoints was used to estimate BMC values associated with a 10% extra risk (BMC10 ) and the associated 95% lower confidence bound (BMCL10 ), which were subsequently converted to human equivalent concentrations (HECs) using a computational fluid dynamics-physiologically based pharmacokinetic (CFD-PBPK) model to account for interspecies dosimetry differences. A composite uncertainty factor of 8.0 was applied to the human equivalent concentration values to yield 8 hour TWA OEL values with a range of 0.16-0.70 ppm. The recommended 8 hour TWA OEL for diacetyl vapor of 0.2 ppm, based on minimal severity of bronchiolar epithelial hyperplasia in the rat, is practical and health-protective.

An assessment of formaldehyde emissions from laminate flooring manufactured in China.

Formaldehyde emissions from two laminate flooring products, labeled as California Air Resources Board (CARB) compliant, were evaluated. Passive 24-hr samples (n = 79) and real-time measurements were collected following installation and removal of the products in two rooms of similar size. Mean formaldehyde concentrations following installation were 0.038 and 0.022 ppm for Products 1 and 2 respectively, and 7 days after flooring removal the concentrations returned to background pre-installation levels. Both products were also evaluated in a small chamber (ASTM D6007) using Deconstructive (de-laminated product) and Non-Deconstructive (intact product) methods. Deconstructive testing showed that Product 1 exceeded the applicable CARB emission standard by 4-fold, while Product 2 was equivalent to the standard. Non-Deconstructive measurements were far below the Deconstructive results and were used to predict 24-hr steady-state room air concentrations. Based on the products that we tested (one of which was found to not be compliant with the CARB standard), the airborne formaldehyde concentrations measured following installation in a real-world setting would not be expected to elicit adverse acute health effects.

Estimation of hand-to-mouth transfer efficiency of lead.

There are currently no published empirical data that characterize hand-to-mouth transfer efficiencies for metallic lead. The purpose of this study was to quantify the hand-to-mouth transfer efficiency of lead in adult volunteers (n = 6) using human saliva as a surrogate for the mouth and commercially available, 100% lead fishing weights as the source of lead for dermal loading. Study volunteers' saliva was collected and subsequently poured onto a sheet of wax paper placed on a balance scale. The volunteers handled lead fishing weights with both hands for approximately 15 s and then pressed three fingers from the right hand (test hand) into their saliva 10 times, with ~0.45kg of pressure. The left hand (control hand) was used as a comparison for dermal loading of lead and had no contact with saliva. SKC Full Disclosure® wipes were used to collect lead from the saliva and skin surfaces. Samples were analyzed using the NIOSH 7300 method, which was modified for wipes. The mean lead skin-to-saliva transfer efficiency was 24% (range: 12-34%). These data will be useful for more accurately characterizing lead hand-to-mouth transfer efficiencies and are likely to be helpful in exposure assessments or human health risk assessments.