Risk assessment for irritating chemicals - Derivation of extrapolation factors
Inge Mangelsdorf1, Katrin Schröder2, Sylvia E Escher2
1Toxicology Consulting, Hamburg, Germany; Fraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine, Hannover, Germany.
Abstract:
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.
More Related Videos
05:47In Silico Modeling Method for Computational Aquatic Toxicology of Endocrine Disruptors: A Software-Based Approach Using QSAR Toolbox
Published on: August 28, 2019
06:25Author Spotlight: High-Throughput Toxicity Screening Using Zebrafish Embryo Startle Response Assay
Published on: January 12, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Types of Toxins
Air pollutants, primarily gases, pose significant threats to respiratory health, leading to conditions like hypoxia, lung cancer, and in extreme cases, death.
Environmental pollutants like...
Effects of Chemicals: Overview
Toxic Reactions: Overview
Toxicity falls into two primary categories: local and systemic.
Local toxicity appears at the exposure site, such as protein denaturation caused by caustic substances.
In contrast, systemic toxicity requires the toxic agent's absorption and distribution,...
Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity
Relative Risk
