| 1. |
- Bui, Thuy T., et al.
(author)
-
Probing the relationship between external and internal human exposure of organophosphate flame retardants using pharmacokinetic modelling
- 2017
-
In: Environmental Pollution. - : Elsevier BV. - 0269-7491 .- 1873-6424. ; 230, s. 550-560
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Human external exposure (i.e. intake) of organophosphate flame retardants (PFRs) has recently been quantified, but no link has yet been established between external and internal exposure. In this study, we used a pharmacokinetic (PK) model to probe the relationship between external and internal exposure data for three PFRs (EHDPHP, TNBP and TPHP) available for a Norwegian cohort of 61 individuals from 61 different households. Using current literature on metabolism of PFRs,, we predicted the metabolite serum/urine concentrations and compared it to measured data from the study population. Unavailable parameters were estimated using a model fitting approach (least squares method) after assigning reasonable constraints on the ranges of fitted parameters. Results showed an acceptable comparison between PK model estimates and measurements (<10-fold deviation) for EHDPHP. However, a deviation of 10-1000 was observed between PM model estimates and measurements for TNBP and TPHP. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis on the PK model revealed that EHDPHP results showed higher uncertainty than TNBP or TPHP. However, there are indications that (1) current biomarkers of exposure (i.e. assumed metabolites) for TNBP and TPHP chemicals might not be specific and ultimately affecting the outcome of the modelling and (2) some exposure pathways might be missing. Further research, such as in vivo laboratory metabolism experiments of PFRs including identification of better biomarkers will reduce uncertainties in human exposure assessment.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bui, Tuong Thuy, et al.
(author)
-
Probing the relationship between external and internal human exposure of organophosphate flame retardants using pharmacokinetic modelling
-
Other publication (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Human external exposure (i.e. intake) of organophosphate flame retardants (PFRs) has recently been quantified, but no link has yet been established between external and internal exposure. In this study, we used a pharmacokinetic (PK) model to probe the relationship between external and internal exposure data for three PFRs (EHDPHP, TNBP and TPHP) available for a Norwegian cohort of 61 individuals from 61 different households. Using current literature on metabolism of PFRs, we predicted the human body burden and compared it to the measured serum and urine data for the PFRs metabolites. Unavailable parameters were estimated using a model fitting approach (least squares method) after assigning reasonable constraints on the ranges of fitted parameters. Results showed an acceptable comparison between PK model estimates and measurements (< 10-fold deviation) for EHDPHP. However, a deviation of 10-1000 was observed between PK model estimates and measurements for TNBP and TPHP. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis on the PK model revealed that EHDPHP results showed higher uncertainty than TNBP or TPHP. However, there are indications that (1) current biomarkers of exposure (i.e. assumed metabolites) for TNBP and TPHP chemicals might not be specific and ultimately affecting the outcome of the modeling, (2) some exposure pathways might be missing. Further research, such as in vivo laboratory metabolism experiments of PFRs including identification of better biomarkers will reduce uncertainties in human exposure assessment.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Giovanoulis, Georgios, et al.
(author)
-
Multi-pathway human exposure assessment of phthalate esters and DINCH
- 2018
-
In: Environment International. - : Elsevier BV. - 0160-4120 .- 1873-6750. ; 112, s. 115-126
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Phthalate esters are substances mainly used as plasticizers in various applications. Some have been restricted and phased out due to their adverse health effects and ubiquitous presence, leading to the introduction of alternative plasticizers, such as DINCH. Using a comprehensive dataset from a Norwegian study population, human exposure to DMP, DEP, DnBP, DiBP, BBzP, DEHP, DINP, DIDP, DPHP and DINCH was assessed by measuring their presence in external exposure media, allowing an estimation of the total intake, as well as the relative importance of different uptake pathways. Intake via different uptake routes, in particular inhalation, dermal absorption, and oral uptake was estimated and total intake based on all uptake pathways was compared to the calculated intake from biomonitoring data. Hand wipe results were used to determine dermal uptake and compared to other exposure sources such as air, dust and personal care products. Results showed that the calculated total intakes were similar, but slightly higher than those based on biomonitoring methods by 1.1 to 3 times (median), indicating a good understanding of important uptake pathways. The relative importance of different uptake pathways was comparable to other studies, where inhalation was important for lower molecular weight phthalates, and negligible for the higher molecular weight phthalates and DINCH. Dietary intake was the predominant exposure route for all analyzed substances. Dermal uptake based on hand wipes was much lower (median up to 2000 times) than the total dermal uptake via air, dust and personal care products. Still, dermal uptake is not a well-studied exposure pathway and several research gaps (e.g. absorption fractions) remain. Based on calculated intakes, the exposure for the Norwegian participants to the phthalates and DINCH was lower than health based limit values. Nevertheless, exposure to alternative plasticizers, such as DPHP and DINCH, is expected to increase in the future and continuous monitoring is required.
|
|
| 5. |
- Giovanoulis, Georgios, et al.
(author)
-
Multi-pathway human exposure assessment of phthalate esters and DINCH
-
Other publication (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Phthalate esters are substances mainly used as plasticizers in various applications. Some have been restricted and phased out due to their adverse health effects and ubiquitous presence, leading to the introduction of alternative plasticizers, such as DINCH. Using a comprehensive dataset from a Norwegian study population, human exposure to DMP, DEP, DnBP, DiBP, BBzP, DEHP, DINP, DIDP, DPHP and DINCH was assessed by measuring their presence in external exposure media, allowing an estimation of the total intake, as well as the relative importance of different uptake pathways. Intake via different uptake routes, in particular inhalation, dermal absorption, and oral uptake was estimated and total intake based on all uptake pathways was compared to the back-calculated intake from biomonitoring data. Hand wipe results were used to determine dermal uptake and compared to other exposure sources such as air, dust and personal care products. Results showed that the calculated total intakes were similar, but slightly higher than those based on biomonitoring methods by 1.1 to 2.8 times (median), indicating a good understanding of important uptake pathways. The relative importance of different uptake pathways was comparable to other studies, where inhalation was important for lower molecular weight phthalates, and negligible for the higher molecular weight phthalates and DINCH. Dietary intake was the predominant exposure route for all analyzed substances. The dermal uptake assessed by hand wipes was much lower (median up to 2000 times) than the sum of dermal uptake via air, dust and personal care products and unlikely represents an integrative dermal exposure. Dermal uptake is not a well-studied exposure pathway and several research gaps (e.g. absorption fractions) remain. Based on calculated intakes, the exposure risk for the Norwegian participants to the phthalates and DINCH was lower than health based limit values. Nevertheless, exposure to alternative plasticizers, such as DPHP and DINCH, is expected to increase in the future and continuous monitoring is required.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
