Albert L. Juhasz, Farzana Kastury, Ruby Jones, Mahima Seeborun, Tanya Caceres, Carina Herde, Michelle Cavallaro, Sarah Dilmetz, Joshua Hutchings, Yevgeniya Grebneva, Chris Desire, Peter Hoffmann
{"title":"PFOA, PFOS and PFHxS toxicokinetic considerations for the development of an in vivo approach for assessing PFAS relative bioavailability in soil","authors":"Albert L. Juhasz, Farzana Kastury, Ruby Jones, Mahima Seeborun, Tanya Caceres, Carina Herde, Michelle Cavallaro, Sarah Dilmetz, Joshua Hutchings, Yevgeniya Grebneva, Chris Desire, Peter Hoffmann","doi":"10.1016/j.envint.2024.109232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A Sprague-Dawley rat model was utilized to elucidate perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) toxicokinetics with a goal of developing an <em>in vivo</em> approach for quantifying PFAS relative bioavailability in impacted soil. Following single dose administration (gavage) of ∼ 0.2–2000 µg kg<sup>−1</sup> BW of PFOA, PFOS or PFHxS, differences in PFAS blood, organ and excreta concentrations were observed over 120 h although linear dose responses were determined for area under the blood plasma time curves (AUC; PFOA, PFHxS), liver accumulation (LA: PFOS) and urinary excretion (UE; PFOA, PFHxS). Oral and intravenous dose (∼20 µg kg<sup>−1</sup> body weight) comparisons highlighted the high absolute bioavailability of PFOA (AUC: 100.3 ± 23.4 %; UE: 94.7 ± 26.6 %), PFOS (LA: 102.9 ± 15.6 %) and PFHxS (AUC: 88.3 ± 15.1 %; UE: 90.9 ± 7.3 %). Two spiked (<sup>14</sup>C-PFOA: 4360 ± 218 µg kg<sup>−1</sup>) and two PFAS impacted soils (PFOS: 1880–2250 µg kg<sup>−1</sup>; PFHxS: 61.2–65.5 µg kg<sup>−1</sup>) were utilized to measure PFAS relative bioavailability in soil matrices. In all soils, PFAS relative bioavailability was > 86 % (PFOA: 87.0–90.9 %; PFOS: 86.1–90.4 %; PFHxS: 86.5–97.0 %) although the method could quantify bioavailability reductions (25.6–88.9 %) when hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions were enhanced through the addition of carbon-based amendments (5–10 % w/w).","PeriodicalId":308,"journal":{"name":"Environment International","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment International","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2024.109232","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A Sprague-Dawley rat model was utilized to elucidate perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) toxicokinetics with a goal of developing an in vivo approach for quantifying PFAS relative bioavailability in impacted soil. Following single dose administration (gavage) of ∼ 0.2–2000 µg kg−1 BW of PFOA, PFOS or PFHxS, differences in PFAS blood, organ and excreta concentrations were observed over 120 h although linear dose responses were determined for area under the blood plasma time curves (AUC; PFOA, PFHxS), liver accumulation (LA: PFOS) and urinary excretion (UE; PFOA, PFHxS). Oral and intravenous dose (∼20 µg kg−1 body weight) comparisons highlighted the high absolute bioavailability of PFOA (AUC: 100.3 ± 23.4 %; UE: 94.7 ± 26.6 %), PFOS (LA: 102.9 ± 15.6 %) and PFHxS (AUC: 88.3 ± 15.1 %; UE: 90.9 ± 7.3 %). Two spiked (14C-PFOA: 4360 ± 218 µg kg−1) and two PFAS impacted soils (PFOS: 1880–2250 µg kg−1; PFHxS: 61.2–65.5 µg kg−1) were utilized to measure PFAS relative bioavailability in soil matrices. In all soils, PFAS relative bioavailability was > 86 % (PFOA: 87.0–90.9 %; PFOS: 86.1–90.4 %; PFHxS: 86.5–97.0 %) although the method could quantify bioavailability reductions (25.6–88.9 %) when hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions were enhanced through the addition of carbon-based amendments (5–10 % w/w).
期刊介绍:
Environmental Health publishes manuscripts focusing on critical aspects of environmental and occupational medicine, including studies in toxicology and epidemiology, to illuminate the human health implications of exposure to environmental hazards. The journal adopts an open-access model and practices open peer review.
It caters to scientists and practitioners across all environmental science domains, directly or indirectly impacting human health and well-being. With a commitment to enhancing the prevention of environmentally-related health risks, Environmental Health serves as a public health journal for the community and scientists engaged in matters of public health significance concerning the environment.