Formaldehyde Carcinogenicity Risk Assessment Using Benchmark Doses Approach Based on Genotoxic Effects in Occupational Exposure

Journal of Chemical Health Risks

مقاله 2، دوره 12، شماره 1، فروردین 2022، صفحه 7-13   

نوع مقاله: Original Article

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22034/jchr.2021.1928582.1296

نویسندگان

Rezvan Zendehdel؛ Masoomeh Vahabi^*

Department of Occupational Health and Safety, School of Public Health and Safety, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

چکیده

Formaldehyde as a mass-produced chemical is used in many contexts. The genotoxicity and mutagenicity of formaldehyde are observed in different human body organs, such as buccal and white blood cells. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the lower confidence interval of benchmark dose (BMDL) for genotoxic damage of formaldehyde in the workplace, according to published studies. Studies from occupational genotoxic damage of formaldehyde were retrieved using search in databases such as Google Scholar, Web of Science, and PubMed until April 2020. The search strategy was established based on the words “formaldehyde”, “genotoxicity”, “carcinogenicity”, “DNA damage,” and “occupational exposure”. Based on dose-response data from three studies, benchmark dose (BMD) analysis was performed using EPA-BMD Software. Finally, five studies were included in the final BMDL conclusion. Polynomial and Hill models were used for BMDL evaluation in three studies, and BMD of formaldehyde was estimated between 0.062 to 0.26 ppm. The lowest level of BMDL (0.028 ppm) in five studies was considered the basic value for genotoxicity risk assessment. The estimated BMDL is approximated to the time-weighted average of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). This value is suggested for the evaluation of the carcinogenic properties of formaldehyde.  

کلیدواژه‌ها

Benchmark dose؛ Formaldehyde؛ DNA damage؛ Occupational exposure؛ BMDL

مراجع

1. Zhang Z.F., Zhang X., Zhang X.M., Liu L.Y., Li Y. F., Sun W., 2020. Indoor occurrence and health risk of formaldehyde, toluene, xylene and total volatile organic compounds derived from an extensive monitoring campaign in Harbin, a megacity of China. Chemosphere. 250, 126324.
2. Bolt H., Johnson G., Nielsen G., Papameletiou D., Klein C., 2016. SCOEL/REC/125 Formaldehyde Recommendation from the Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits. Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits
3. Yalcin E., Cavusoglu K., Cicek F., Demirtas G., Tasli B., 2015. Histopathological and Biochemical Changes in Swiss Albino Mice Induced by Formaldehyde: Protective Effect of Green Tea Extract. Cytologia. 80(4), 467-473.
4. Zendehdel R., Jouni F.J., Hajipour B., Panjali Z., Kheiri H., Vahabi M., 2017. DNA damage in workers exposed to formaldehyde at concentrations below occupational exposure limits. Toxicological & Environmental Chemistry. 99(9-10), 1409-1417.
5. Athanassiadis B., George G., Abbott P., Wash L., 2015. A review of the effects of formaldehyde release from endodontic materials. International Endodontic Journal. 48(9), 829-838.
6. Arts J.H., Rennen M.A., de Heer C., 2006. Inhaled formaldehyde: evaluation of sensory irritation in relation to carcinogenicity. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 44(2), 144-160.
7. Nielsen G.D., Larsen S.T., Wolkoff P., 2013. Recent trend in risk assessment of formaldehyde exposures from indoor air. Archives of Toxicology. 87(1), 73-98.
8. IARC, 2012. Chemical Agents and Related Occupations. IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risks Hum 100F.
9. WHO, 2010. WHO guidelines for indoor air quality: selected pollutants.
10. US-EPA, 2010. Toxicological Review of Formaldehyde -Inhalation Assessment, http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/.
11. Bernardini L., Barbosa E., Charão M. F., Brucker N., 2020. Formaldehyde toxicity reports from in vitro and in vivo studies: a review and updated data. Drug Chem Toxicol. 1-13.
12. Ye X., Ji Z., Wei C., McHale C.M., Ding S., Thomas R., Yang X., Zhang L., 2013. Inhaled formaldehyde induces DNA–protein crosslinks and oxidative stress in bone marrow and other distant organs of exposed mice. Environ Mol Mutagen. 54(9), 705-718.
13. Ladeira C., Viegas S., Carolino E., Prista J., Gomes M. C., Brito M., 2011. Genotoxicity biomarkers in occupational exposure to formaldehyde—the case of histopathology laboratories. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis. 721(1), 15-20.
14. Albertini R.J., Kaden D.A., 2017. Do chromosome changes in blood cells implicate formaldehyde as a leukemogen? Crit Rev Toxicol. 47(2), 145-184.
15. Öberg M., 2010. Benchmark dose approaches in chemical health risk assessment in relation to number and distress of laboratory animals. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 58(3), 451-454.
16. Davis J.A., Gift J.S., Zhao Q.J., 2011. Introduction to benchmark dose methods and US EPA's benchmark dose software (BMDS) version 2.1. 1. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology. 254(2), 181-191.
17. Weldon B.A., Griffith W.C., Workman T., Scoville D.K., Kavanagh T.J., Faustman E.M., 2018. In vitro to in vivo benchmark dose comparisons to inform risk assessment of quantum dot nanomaterials. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology. 10(4), e1507.
18. WHO, 2009. World Health Organization: Principles for modelling dose-response for the risk assessment of chemicals.
19. ECHA, 2012. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R. 8: Characterisation of dose [concentration]-response for human health. Chapter R, 8
20. Kamata E., Nakadate M., Uchida O., Ogawa Y., Suzuki S., Kaneko T., Ssito M., Kurokawa Y., 1997. Results of a 28-month chronic inhalation toxicity study of formaldehyde in male Fisher-344 rats. The Journal of Toxicological Sciences. 22(3), 239-254.
21. Zendehdel R., Vahabi M., Sedghi R., 2018. Estimation of formaldehyde occupational exposure limit based on genetic damage in some Iranian exposed workers using benchmark dose method. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 25(31), 31183-31189.
22. Wang K., Wang T., Xu J., Zhu Y., Jian L., Au W., Xia Z., 2019. Determination of benchmark dose based on adduct and micronucleus formations in formaldehyde-exposed workers. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health. 222(5), 738-743
23. Ballarin C., Sarto F., Giacomelli L., Bartolucci G.B., Clonfero E., 1992. Micronucleated cells in nasal mucosa of formaldehyde-exposed workers. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology. 280(1), 1-7.
24. Jiang S., Yu L., Cheng J., Leng S., Dai Y., Zhang Y., Niu Y., Yan H., Qu W., Zhang C., 2010. Genomic damages in peripheral blood lymphocytes and association with polymorphisms of three glutathione S-transferases in workers exposed to formaldehyde. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis. 695(1), 9-15.
25. Lin D., Guo Y., Yi J., Kuang D., Li X., Deng H., Huang K., Guan L., He Y., Zhang X., 2013. Occupational exposure to formaldehyde and genetic damage in the peripheral blood lymphocytes of plywood workers. Journal of Occupational Health. 55(4), 284-291.
26. ACGIH, 2020. Threshold limit values for chemical substances and physical agents and biological exposure indices, http://www.acgih.org/tlv-bei-guidelines/.
27. USEPA, 2012. Benchmark Dose Technical Guidance. Risk Assessment Forum. Washington, DC 20460. EPA/100/R-12/001. . US Environmental Protection Agency
28. Nielsen G.D., Larsen S.T., Wolkoff P., 2017. Re-evaluation of the WHO (2010) formaldehyde indoor air quality guideline for cancer risk assessment. Archives of Toxicology. 91(1), 35-61.