Pub Date : 2021-10-03Epub Date: 2021-07-18DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2021.1943087
Anuk Burli, Nadia Kashetsky, Aileen Feschuk, Rebecca M Law, Howard I Maibach
Water-only or soap and water solutions are considered a gold standard for skin decontamination. However, there is lack of conclusive data regarding their efficacy. The aim of this study was to summarize in vivo animal model data on skin decontamination using water-only, and/or soap and water. Covidence, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant articles using water-only or soap and water decontamination methods in in vivo animals. Data extraction was completed from studies, representing three animal models, and 11 contaminants. Results demonstrated water-only decontamination solutions led to complete decontamination in 3.1% (n = 16/524) protocols, incomplete decontamination in 90.6% (n = 475/524) of protocols, and mortality in 6.3% (n = 33/524) of protocols. Soap and water decontamination solutions resulted in complete decontamination in 6.9% (n = 8/116) protocols, incomplete decontamination in 92.2% (n = 107/116) of protocols, and mortality in 6.9% (n = 8/116) of protocols. Although water only, or soap and water is considered a gold standard for skin decontamination, most papers investigated found that water only, and soap and water provided incomplete decontamination. Due to the insufficient data, and limitations that hinder the applicability of available data, evidence indicates that more contemporary studies investigating skin decontamination are needed, and compared to other model species, including humans, when practical.
{"title":"Efficacy of soap and water based skin decontamination using <i>in vivo</i> animal models: a systematic review.","authors":"Anuk Burli, Nadia Kashetsky, Aileen Feschuk, Rebecca M Law, Howard I Maibach","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1943087","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2021.1943087","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Water-only or soap and water solutions are considered a gold standard for skin decontamination. However, there is lack of conclusive data regarding their efficacy. The aim of this study was to summarize <i>in vivo</i> animal model data on skin decontamination using water-only, and/or soap and water. Covidence, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant articles using water-only or soap and water decontamination methods in <i>in vivo</i> animals. Data extraction was completed from studies, representing three animal models, and 11 contaminants. Results demonstrated water-only decontamination solutions led to complete decontamination in 3.1% (n = 16/524) protocols, incomplete decontamination in 90.6% (n = 475/524) of protocols, and mortality in 6.3% (n = 33/524) of protocols. Soap and water decontamination solutions resulted in complete decontamination in 6.9% (n = 8/116) protocols, incomplete decontamination in 92.2% (n = 107/116) of protocols, and mortality in 6.9% (n = 8/116) of protocols. Although water only, or soap and water is considered a gold standard for skin decontamination, most papers investigated found that water only, and soap and water provided incomplete decontamination. Due to the insufficient data, and limitations that hinder the applicability of available data, evidence indicates that more contemporary studies investigating skin decontamination are needed, and compared to other model species, including humans, when practical.</p>","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 7","pages":"325-336"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10937404.2021.1943087","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39197612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-03Epub Date: 2021-06-06DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2021.1934764
Jennifer L Griggs, David J Thomas, Rebecca Fry, Karen D Bradham
Widespread contamination of soil, dust, and food with toxic metal(loid)s pose a significant public health concern. Only a portion of orally ingested metal(loid) contaminants are bioavailable, which is defined as the fraction of ingested metal(loid)s absorbed across the gastrointestinal barrier and into systemic circulation. Bioaccessibility tools are a class of in vitro assays used as a surrogate to estimate risk of oral exposure and bioavailability. Although development and use of bioaccessibility tools have contributed to our understanding of the factors influencing oral bioavailability of metal(loid)s, some of these assays may lack data that support their use in decisions concerning adverse health risks and soil remediation. This review discusses the factors known to influence bioaccessibility of metal(loid) contaminants and evaluates experimental approaches and key findings of SW-846 Test Method 1340, Unified BARGE Method, Simulated Human Intestinal Microbial Ecosystem, Solubility Bioaccessibility Research Consortium assay, In Vitro Gastrointestinal model, TNO-Gastrointestinal Model, and Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment bioaccessibility models which are used to assess oral absolute bioavailability and relative bioavailability in solid matrices. The aim of this review was to identify emerging knowledge gaps and research needs with an emphasis on research required to evaluate these models on (1) standardization of assay techniques and methodology, and (2) use of common criteria for assessing the performance of bioaccessibility models.
{"title":"Improving the predictive value of bioaccessibility assays and their use to provide mechanistic insights into bioavailability for toxic metals/metalloids - A research prospectus.","authors":"Jennifer L Griggs, David J Thomas, Rebecca Fry, Karen D Bradham","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1934764","DOIUrl":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1934764","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Widespread contamination of soil, dust, and food with toxic metal(loid)s pose a significant public health concern. Only a portion of orally ingested metal(loid) contaminants are bioavailable, which is defined as the fraction of ingested metal(loid)s absorbed across the gastrointestinal barrier and into systemic circulation. Bioaccessibility tools are a class of <i>in vitro</i> assays used as a surrogate to estimate risk of oral exposure and bioavailability. Although development and use of bioaccessibility tools have contributed to our understanding of the factors influencing oral bioavailability of metal(loid)s, some of these assays may lack data that support their use in decisions concerning adverse health risks and soil remediation. This review discusses the factors known to influence bioaccessibility of metal(loid) contaminants and evaluates experimental approaches and key findings of SW-846 Test Method 1340, Unified BARGE Method, Simulated Human Intestinal Microbial Ecosystem, Solubility Bioaccessibility Research Consortium assay, <i>In Vitro</i> Gastrointestinal model, TNO-Gastrointestinal Model, and Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment bioaccessibility models which are used to assess oral absolute bioavailability and relative bioavailability in solid matrices. The aim of this review was to identify emerging knowledge gaps and research needs with an emphasis on research required to evaluate these models on (1) standardization of assay techniques and methodology, and (2) use of common criteria for assessing the performance of bioaccessibility models.</p>","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 7","pages":"307-324"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4,"publicationDate":"2021-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8390437/pdf/nihms-1714327.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39065794","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT Percutaneous absorption of chemicals is a potential route of topical and systemic toxicity. Skin decontamination interrupts this process by removing contaminants from the skin surface. Decontamination using water-only or soap and water solutions is the current gold standard despite limited efficacy data. A summary of studies evaluating their efficacy in decontaminating occupational contaminants from in vitro human skin models is presented. Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles and data extracted from 15 investigations that reported on 21 occupational contaminants, which were further classified as industrial chemicals, drugs, or pesticides. Water-only decontamination yielded no response in 4.3% (n = 6/140) and partial decontamination in 95.7% (n = 134/140) of skin samples. Soap and water decontamination yielded complete decontamination in 4.9% (n = 13/264) and partial decontamination in 95.1% (n = 251/264) of skin samples. Four studies (26.7%, n = 4/15) reported increased penetration rates or skin concentration of contaminants following decontamination, demonstrating a “wash-in” effect. Varying study methodologies hinder our ability to compare data and determine when water alone or soap and water are best used. International harmonized efficacy protocol might enhance our decontamination understanding and enable a more customized approach to decontamination clinical practice and research.
{"title":"Efficacy of water-based skin decontamination of occupational chemicals using <i>in vitro</i> human skin models: a systematic review.","authors":"Chavy Chiang, Nadia Kashetsky, Aileen Feschuk, Anuk Burli, Rebecca Law, Howard Maibach","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1957048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2021.1957048","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Percutaneous absorption of chemicals is a potential route of topical and systemic toxicity. Skin decontamination interrupts this process by removing contaminants from the skin surface. Decontamination using water-only or soap and water solutions is the current gold standard despite limited efficacy data. A summary of studies evaluating their efficacy in decontaminating occupational contaminants from in vitro human skin models is presented. Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles and data extracted from 15 investigations that reported on 21 occupational contaminants, which were further classified as industrial chemicals, drugs, or pesticides. Water-only decontamination yielded no response in 4.3% (n = 6/140) and partial decontamination in 95.7% (n = 134/140) of skin samples. Soap and water decontamination yielded complete decontamination in 4.9% (n = 13/264) and partial decontamination in 95.1% (n = 251/264) of skin samples. Four studies (26.7%, n = 4/15) reported increased penetration rates or skin concentration of contaminants following decontamination, demonstrating a “wash-in” effect. Varying study methodologies hinder our ability to compare data and determine when water alone or soap and water are best used. International harmonized efficacy protocol might enhance our decontamination understanding and enable a more customized approach to decontamination clinical practice and research.","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 7","pages":"337-353"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10937404.2021.1957048","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39221931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-18Epub Date: 2021-07-05DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2021.1902890
Philip N Smith, Kevin L Armbrust, Richard A Brain, Wenlin Chen, Nika Galic, Lula Ghebremichael, Jeffrey M Giddings, Mark L Hanson, Jonathan Maul, Glen Van Der Kraak, Keith R Solomon
<p><p>Atrazine is a triazine herbicide used predominantly on corn, sorghum, and sugarcane in the US. Its use potentially overlaps with the ranges of listed (threatened and endangered) species. In response to registration review in the context of the Endangered Species Act, we evaluated potential direct and indirect impacts of atrazine on listed species and designated critical habitats. Atrazine has been widely studied, extensive environmental monitoring and toxicity data sets are available, and the spatial and temporal uses on major crops are well characterized. Ranges of listed species are less well-defined, resulting in overly conservative designations of "May Effect". Preferences for habitat and food sources serve to limit exposure among many listed animal species and animals are relatively insensitive. Atrazine does not bioaccumulate, further diminishing exposures among consumers and predators. Because of incomplete exposure pathways, many species can be eliminated from consideration for direct effects. It is toxic to plants, but even sensitive plants tolerate episodic exposures, such as those occurring in flowing waters. Empirical data from long-term monitoring programs and realistic field data on off-target deposition of drift indicate that many other listed species can be removed from consideration because exposures are below conservative toxicity thresholds for direct and indirect effects. Combined with recent mitigation actions by the registrant, this review serves to refine and focus forthcoming listed species assessment efforts for atrazine.<b>Abbreviations:</b> a.i. = Active ingredient (of a pesticide product). AEMP = Atrazine Ecological Monitoring Program. AIMS = Avian Incident Monitoring SystemArach. = Arachnid (spiders and mites). AUC = Area Under the Curve. BE = Biological Evaluation (of potential effects on listed species). BO = Biological Opinion (conclusion of the consultation between USEPA and the Services with respect to potential effects in listed species). CASM = Comprehensive Aquatic System Model. CDL = Crop Data LayerCN = field Curve Number. CRP = Conservation Reserve Program (lands). CTA = Conditioned Taste Avoidance. DAC = Diaminochlorotriazine (a metabolite of atrazine, also known by the acronym DACT). DER = Data Evaluation Record. EC25 = Concentration causing a specified effect in 25% of the tested organisms. EC50 = Concentration causing a specified effect in 50% of the tested organisms. EC50<sub>RGR</sub> = Concentration causing a 50% reduction in relative growth rate. ECOS = Environmental Conservation Online System. EDD = Estimated Daily Dose. EEC = Expected Environmental Concentration. EFED = Environmental Fate and Effects Division (of the USEPA). EFSA = European Food Safety Agency. EIIS = Ecological Incident Information System. ERA = Environmental Risk Assessment. ESA = Endangered Species Act. ESU = Evolutionarily Significant UnitsFAR = Field Application RateFIFRA = Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
{"title":"Assessment of risks to listed species from the use of atrazine in the USA: a perspective.","authors":"Philip N Smith, Kevin L Armbrust, Richard A Brain, Wenlin Chen, Nika Galic, Lula Ghebremichael, Jeffrey M Giddings, Mark L Hanson, Jonathan Maul, Glen Van Der Kraak, Keith R Solomon","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1902890","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2021.1902890","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Atrazine is a triazine herbicide used predominantly on corn, sorghum, and sugarcane in the US. Its use potentially overlaps with the ranges of listed (threatened and endangered) species. In response to registration review in the context of the Endangered Species Act, we evaluated potential direct and indirect impacts of atrazine on listed species and designated critical habitats. Atrazine has been widely studied, extensive environmental monitoring and toxicity data sets are available, and the spatial and temporal uses on major crops are well characterized. Ranges of listed species are less well-defined, resulting in overly conservative designations of \"May Effect\". Preferences for habitat and food sources serve to limit exposure among many listed animal species and animals are relatively insensitive. Atrazine does not bioaccumulate, further diminishing exposures among consumers and predators. Because of incomplete exposure pathways, many species can be eliminated from consideration for direct effects. It is toxic to plants, but even sensitive plants tolerate episodic exposures, such as those occurring in flowing waters. Empirical data from long-term monitoring programs and realistic field data on off-target deposition of drift indicate that many other listed species can be removed from consideration because exposures are below conservative toxicity thresholds for direct and indirect effects. Combined with recent mitigation actions by the registrant, this review serves to refine and focus forthcoming listed species assessment efforts for atrazine.<b>Abbreviations:</b> a.i. = Active ingredient (of a pesticide product). AEMP = Atrazine Ecological Monitoring Program. AIMS = Avian Incident Monitoring SystemArach. = Arachnid (spiders and mites). AUC = Area Under the Curve. BE = Biological Evaluation (of potential effects on listed species). BO = Biological Opinion (conclusion of the consultation between USEPA and the Services with respect to potential effects in listed species). CASM = Comprehensive Aquatic System Model. CDL = Crop Data LayerCN = field Curve Number. CRP = Conservation Reserve Program (lands). CTA = Conditioned Taste Avoidance. DAC = Diaminochlorotriazine (a metabolite of atrazine, also known by the acronym DACT). DER = Data Evaluation Record. EC25 = Concentration causing a specified effect in 25% of the tested organisms. EC50 = Concentration causing a specified effect in 50% of the tested organisms. EC50<sub>RGR</sub> = Concentration causing a 50% reduction in relative growth rate. ECOS = Environmental Conservation Online System. EDD = Estimated Daily Dose. EEC = Expected Environmental Concentration. EFED = Environmental Fate and Effects Division (of the USEPA). EFSA = European Food Safety Agency. EIIS = Ecological Incident Information System. ERA = Environmental Risk Assessment. ESA = Endangered Species Act. ESU = Evolutionarily Significant UnitsFAR = Field Application RateFIFRA = Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide ","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 6","pages":"223-306"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10937404.2021.1902890","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39157548","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-17DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2021.1936319
A B Stefaniak, S Du Preez, J L Du Plessis
<p><p>This comprehensive review introduces occupational (industrial) hygienists and toxicologists to the seven basic additive manufacturing (AM) process categories. Forty-six articles were identified that reported real-world measurements for all AM processes, except sheet lamination. Particles released from powder bed fusion (PBF), material jetting (MJ), material extrusion (ME), and directed energy deposition (DED) processes exhibited nanoscale to submicron scale; real-time particle number (mobility sizers, condensation nuclei counters, miniDiSC, electrical diffusion batteries) and surface area monitors (diffusion chargers) were generally sufficient for these processes. Binder jetting (BJ) machines released particles up to 8.5 µm; optical particle sizers (number) and laser scattering photometers (mass) were sufficient for this process. PBF and DED processes (powdered metallic feedstocks) released particles that contained respiratory irritants (chromium, molybdenum), central nervous system toxicants (manganese), and carcinogens (nickel). All process categories, except those that use metallic feedstocks, released organic gases, including (but not limited to), respiratory irritants (toluene, xylenes), asthmagens (methyl methacrylate, styrene), and carcinogens (benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde). Real-time photoionization detectors for total volatile organics provided useful information for processes that utilize polymer feedstock materials. More research is needed to understand 1) facility-, machine-, and feedstock-related factors that influence emissions and exposures, 2) dermal exposure and biological burden, and 3) task-based exposures. Harmonized emissions monitoring and exposure assessment approaches are needed to facilitate inter-comparison of study results. Improved understanding of AM process emissions and exposures is needed for hygienists to ensure appropriate health and safety conditions for workers and for toxicologists to design experimental protocols that accurately mimic real-world exposure conditions.<b>ABBREVIATIONS</b> ABS : acrylonitrile butadiene styrene; ACGIH® TLV® : American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists Threshold Limit Value; ACH : air change per hour; AM : additive manufacturing; ASA : acrylonitrile styrene acrylate; AVP : acetone vapor polishing; BJ : binder jetting; CAM-LEM : computer-aided manufacturing of laminated engineering materials; CNF : carbon nanofiber; CNT : carbon nanotube; CP : co-polyester; CNC : condensation nuclei counter; CVP : chloroform vapor polishing; DED : directed energy deposition; DLP : digital light processing; EBM : electron beam melting; EELS : electron energy loss spectrometry; EDB : electrical diffusion batteries; EDX : energy dispersive x-ray analyzer; ER : emission rate; FDM™ : fused deposition modeling; FFF : fused filament fabrication; IAQ : indoor air quality; LSP : laser scattering photometer; LCD : liquid crystal display; LDSA : lung deposited particle surface area;
{"title":"Additive Manufacturing for Occupational Hygiene: A Comprehensive Review of Processes, Emissions, & Exposures.","authors":"A B Stefaniak, S Du Preez, J L Du Plessis","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1936319","DOIUrl":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1936319","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This comprehensive review introduces occupational (industrial) hygienists and toxicologists to the seven basic additive manufacturing (AM) process categories. Forty-six articles were identified that reported real-world measurements for all AM processes, except sheet lamination. Particles released from powder bed fusion (PBF), material jetting (MJ), material extrusion (ME), and directed energy deposition (DED) processes exhibited nanoscale to submicron scale; real-time particle number (mobility sizers, condensation nuclei counters, miniDiSC, electrical diffusion batteries) and surface area monitors (diffusion chargers) were generally sufficient for these processes. Binder jetting (BJ) machines released particles up to 8.5 µm; optical particle sizers (number) and laser scattering photometers (mass) were sufficient for this process. PBF and DED processes (powdered metallic feedstocks) released particles that contained respiratory irritants (chromium, molybdenum), central nervous system toxicants (manganese), and carcinogens (nickel). All process categories, except those that use metallic feedstocks, released organic gases, including (but not limited to), respiratory irritants (toluene, xylenes), asthmagens (methyl methacrylate, styrene), and carcinogens (benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde). Real-time photoionization detectors for total volatile organics provided useful information for processes that utilize polymer feedstock materials. More research is needed to understand 1) facility-, machine-, and feedstock-related factors that influence emissions and exposures, 2) dermal exposure and biological burden, and 3) task-based exposures. Harmonized emissions monitoring and exposure assessment approaches are needed to facilitate inter-comparison of study results. Improved understanding of AM process emissions and exposures is needed for hygienists to ensure appropriate health and safety conditions for workers and for toxicologists to design experimental protocols that accurately mimic real-world exposure conditions.<b>ABBREVIATIONS</b> ABS : acrylonitrile butadiene styrene; ACGIH® TLV® : American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists Threshold Limit Value; ACH : air change per hour; AM : additive manufacturing; ASA : acrylonitrile styrene acrylate; AVP : acetone vapor polishing; BJ : binder jetting; CAM-LEM : computer-aided manufacturing of laminated engineering materials; CNF : carbon nanofiber; CNT : carbon nanotube; CP : co-polyester; CNC : condensation nuclei counter; CVP : chloroform vapor polishing; DED : directed energy deposition; DLP : digital light processing; EBM : electron beam melting; EELS : electron energy loss spectrometry; EDB : electrical diffusion batteries; EDX : energy dispersive x-ray analyzer; ER : emission rate; FDM™ : fused deposition modeling; FFF : fused filament fabrication; IAQ : indoor air quality; LSP : laser scattering photometer; LCD : liquid crystal display; LDSA : lung deposited particle surface area;","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"1-50"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8678392/pdf/nihms-1717812.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10362397","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-19Epub Date: 2021-04-08DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2021.1907264
Kyu-Bong Kim, Seung Jun Kwack, Joo Young Lee, Sam Kacew, Byung-Mu Lee
Risk assessment of cosmetic ingredients is a useful scientific method to characterize potential adverse effects resulting from using cosmetics. The process of risk assessment consists of four steps: hazard identification, dose-response assessment, exposure assessment, and risk characterization. Hazard identification of chemicals refers to the initial stage of risk assessment and generally utilizes animal studies to evaluate toxicity. Since 2013, however, toxicity studies of cosmetic ingredients using animals have not been permitted in the EU and alternative toxicity test methods for animal studies have momentum to be developed for cosmetic ingredients. In this paper, we briefly review the alternative test methods that are available for cosmetic ingredients including read-across, in silico, in chemico, and invitro methods. In addition, new technologies such as omics and artificial intelligence (AI) have been discussed to expand or improve the knowledge and hazard identification of cosmetic ingredients. Aggregate exposure of cosmetic ingredients is another safety issue and methods for its improvement were reviewed. There have been concerns over the safety of nano-cosmetics for a long time, but the risk of nano-cosmetics remains unclear. Therefore, current issues of cosmetic risk assessment are discussed and expert opinion will be provided for the safety of cosmetics.
{"title":"Current opinion on risk assessment of cosmetics.","authors":"Kyu-Bong Kim, Seung Jun Kwack, Joo Young Lee, Sam Kacew, Byung-Mu Lee","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1907264","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2021.1907264","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Risk assessment of cosmetic ingredients is a useful scientific method to characterize potential adverse effects resulting from using cosmetics. The process of risk assessment consists of four steps: hazard identification, dose-response assessment, exposure assessment, and risk characterization. Hazard identification of chemicals refers to the initial stage of risk assessment and generally utilizes animal studies to evaluate toxicity. Since 2013, however, toxicity studies of cosmetic ingredients using animals have not been permitted in the EU and alternative toxicity test methods for animal studies have momentum to be developed for cosmetic ingredients. In this paper, we briefly review the alternative test methods that are available for cosmetic ingredients including read-across, <i>in silico, in chemico</i>, and <i>in</i><i>vitro</i> methods. In addition, new technologies such as omics and artificial intelligence (AI) have been discussed to expand or improve the knowledge and hazard identification of cosmetic ingredients. Aggregate exposure of cosmetic ingredients is another safety issue and methods for its improvement were reviewed. There have been concerns over the safety of nano-cosmetics for a long time, but the risk of nano-cosmetics remains unclear. Therefore, current issues of cosmetic risk assessment are discussed and expert opinion will be provided for the safety of cosmetics.</p>","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 4","pages":"137-161"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10937404.2021.1907264","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25574734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-19Epub Date: 2021-03-14DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2021.1897911
Kristine Krajnak
The International Standard Organization (ISO) standard 13091-1 describes methods and procedures for performing the vibrotactile perception threshold (VPT) testing to diagnose changes in tactile sensory function associated with occupational exposures. However, the VPT test also has been used in the diagnosis of peripheral neuropathies associated with a number of disorders. This review examines the VPT test, variations in procedures that have been used, as well as disorders and diseases in which this test has been reliable for the detection of sensory changes. Mechanisms potentially underlying the changes in VPTs are also discussed along with procedural and subject/patient factors that may affect the interpretation of test results. Based upon the review of the literature, there are also suggestions for where additional research might improve the administration of this test, depending upon the subject/patient population and interpretation of data.
{"title":"Vibrotactile sensitivity testing for occupational and disease-induce peripheral neuropathies.","authors":"Kristine Krajnak","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1897911","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2021.1897911","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The International Standard Organization (ISO) standard 13091-1 describes methods and procedures for performing the vibrotactile perception threshold (VPT) testing to diagnose changes in tactile sensory function associated with occupational exposures. However, the VPT test also has been used in the diagnosis of peripheral neuropathies associated with a number of disorders. This review examines the VPT test, variations in procedures that have been used, as well as disorders and diseases in which this test has been reliable for the detection of sensory changes. Mechanisms potentially underlying the changes in VPTs are also discussed along with procedural and subject/patient factors that may affect the interpretation of test results. Based upon the review of the literature, there are also suggestions for where additional research might improve the administration of this test, depending upon the subject/patient population and interpretation of data.</p>","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 4","pages":"162-172"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10937404.2021.1897911","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25479127","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Arsenic (As) occurs naturally in geologic conditions, but groundwater contamination might also be found due to the consequences of mining, agricultural and industrial processes. Human exposure to As after drinking contaminated water is commonly associated with acute toxicity outcomes and chronic effects ranging from skin lesions to cancer. Integrated actions from environmental and health authorities are needed to reduce exposure, monitoring outcomes, and promotion of actions to offer sustainable As-safe water alternatives. Considering recent research trends, the present review summarizes and discusses current issues associated with the process and effects of contamination and decontamination in an environmental health perspective. Recent findings reinforce the harmful effects of the consumption of As-contaminated water and broaden the scope of related diseases including intestinal maladies, type 2 diabetes, cancers of bladder, kidneys, lung, and liver. Among the main strategies to diminish or remove As from water, the following are highlighted (1) ion exchange system and membrane filtration (micro, ultra, and nanofiltration) as physicochemical treatment systems; (2) use of cyanobacteria and algae in bioremediation programs and (3) application of nanotechnology for water treatment.
{"title":"Arsenic exposure from groundwater: environmental contamination, human health effects, and sustainable solutions.","authors":"Elida Cristina Monteiro De Oliveira, Evelyn Siqueira Caixeta, Vanessa Santana Vieira Santos, Boscolli Barbosa Pereira","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1898504","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2021.1898504","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Arsenic (As) occurs naturally in geologic conditions, but groundwater contamination might also be found due to the consequences of mining, agricultural and industrial processes. Human exposure to As after drinking contaminated water is commonly associated with acute toxicity outcomes and chronic effects ranging from skin lesions to cancer. Integrated actions from environmental and health authorities are needed to reduce exposure, monitoring outcomes, and promotion of actions to offer sustainable As-safe water alternatives. Considering recent research trends, the present review summarizes and discusses current issues associated with the process and effects of contamination and decontamination in an environmental health perspective. Recent findings reinforce the harmful effects of the consumption of As-contaminated water and broaden the scope of related diseases including intestinal maladies, type 2 diabetes, cancers of bladder, kidneys, lung, and liver. Among the main strategies to diminish or remove As from water, the following are highlighted (1) ion exchange system and membrane filtration (micro, ultra, and nanofiltration) as physicochemical treatment systems; (2) use of cyanobacteria and algae in bioremediation programs and (3) application of nanotechnology for water treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 3","pages":"119-135"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10937404.2021.1898504","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25480777","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03Epub Date: 2020-12-23DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2020.1860842
Jae Hyeon Park, Byung Mu Lee, Hyung Sik Kim
Curcumin, used as a spice and traditional medicine in India, exerts beneficial effects against several diseases, owing to its antioxidant, analgesic, and anti-inflammatory properties. Evidence indicates that curcumin might protect against heavy metal-induced organ toxicity by targeting biological pathways involved in anti-oxidation, anti-inflammation, and anti-tumorigenesis. Curcumin has received considerable attention owing to its therapeutic properties, and the mechanisms underlying some of its actions have been recently investigated. Cadmium (Cd) is a heavy metal found in the environment and used extensively in industries. Chronic Cd exposure induces damage to bones, liver, kidneys, lungs, testes, and the immune and cardiovascular systems. Because of its long half-life, exposure to even low Cd levels might be harmful. Cd-induced toxicity involves the overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS), resulting in oxidative stress and damage to essential biomolecules. Dietary antioxidants, such as chelating agents, display the potential to reduce Cd accumulation and metal-induced toxicity. Curcumin scavenges ROS and inhibits oxidative damage, thus resulting in many therapeutic properties. This review aims to address the effectiveness of curcumin against Cd-induced organ toxicity and presents evidence supporting the use of curcumin as a protective antioxidant.
{"title":"Potential protective roles of curcumin against cadmium-induced toxicity and oxidative stress.","authors":"Jae Hyeon Park, Byung Mu Lee, Hyung Sik Kim","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2020.1860842","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2020.1860842","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Curcumin, used as a spice and traditional medicine in India, exerts beneficial effects against several diseases, owing to its antioxidant, analgesic, and anti-inflammatory properties. Evidence indicates that curcumin might protect against heavy metal-induced organ toxicity by targeting biological pathways involved in anti-oxidation, anti-inflammation, and anti-tumorigenesis. Curcumin has received considerable attention owing to its therapeutic properties, and the mechanisms underlying some of its actions have been recently investigated. Cadmium (Cd) is a heavy metal found in the environment and used extensively in industries. Chronic Cd exposure induces damage to bones, liver, kidneys, lungs, testes, and the immune and cardiovascular systems. Because of its long half-life, exposure to even low Cd levels might be harmful. Cd-induced toxicity involves the overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS), resulting in oxidative stress and damage to essential biomolecules. Dietary antioxidants, such as chelating agents, display the potential to reduce Cd accumulation and metal-induced toxicity. Curcumin scavenges ROS and inhibits oxidative damage, thus resulting in many therapeutic properties. This review aims to address the effectiveness of curcumin against Cd-induced organ toxicity and presents evidence supporting the use of curcumin as a protective antioxidant.</p>","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 3","pages":"95-118"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10937404.2020.1860842","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38746018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-17Epub Date: 2021-02-22DOI: 10.1080/10937404.2021.1884921
Jessica H Hartman, Samuel J Widmayer, Christina M Bergemann, Dillon E King, Katherine S Morton, Riccardo F Romersi, Laura E Jameson, Maxwell C K Leung, Erik C Andersen, Stefan Taubert, Joel N Meyer
Caenorhabditis elegans has emerged as a major model in biomedical and environmental toxicology. Numerous papers on toxicology and pharmacology in C. elegans have been published, and this species has now been adopted by investigators in academic toxicology, pharmacology, and drug discovery labs. C. elegans has also attracted the interest of governmental regulatory agencies charged with evaluating the safety of chemicals. However, a major, fundamental aspect of toxicological science remains underdeveloped in C. elegans: xenobiotic metabolism and transport processes that are critical to understanding toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics, and extrapolation to other species. The aim of this review was to initially briefly describe the history and trajectory of the use of C. elegans in toxicological and pharmacological studies. Subsequently, physical barriers to chemical uptake and the role of the worm microbiome in xenobiotic transformation were described. Then a review of what is and is not known regarding the classic Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III processes was performed. In addition, the following were discussed (1) regulation of xenobiotic metabolism; (2) review of published toxicokinetics for specific chemicals; and (3) genetic diversity of these processes in C. elegans. Finally, worm xenobiotic transport and metabolism was placed in an evolutionary context; key areas for future research highlighted; and implications for extrapolating C. elegans toxicity results to other species discussed.
{"title":"Xenobiotic metabolism and transport in <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>.","authors":"Jessica H Hartman, Samuel J Widmayer, Christina M Bergemann, Dillon E King, Katherine S Morton, Riccardo F Romersi, Laura E Jameson, Maxwell C K Leung, Erik C Andersen, Stefan Taubert, Joel N Meyer","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1884921","DOIUrl":"10.1080/10937404.2021.1884921","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> has emerged as a major model in biomedical and environmental toxicology. Numerous papers on toxicology and pharmacology in <i>C. elegans</i> have been published, and this species has now been adopted by investigators in academic toxicology, pharmacology, and drug discovery labs. <i>C. elegans</i> has also attracted the interest of governmental regulatory agencies charged with evaluating the safety of chemicals. However, a major, fundamental aspect of toxicological science remains underdeveloped in <i>C. elegans</i>: xenobiotic metabolism and transport processes that are critical to understanding toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics, and extrapolation to other species. The aim of this review was to initially briefly describe the history and trajectory of the use of <i>C. elegans</i> in toxicological and pharmacological studies. Subsequently, physical barriers to chemical uptake and the role of the worm microbiome in xenobiotic transformation were described. Then a review of what is and is not known regarding the classic Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III processes was performed. In addition, the following were discussed (1) regulation of xenobiotic metabolism; (2) review of published toxicokinetics for specific chemicals; and (3) genetic diversity of these processes in <i>C. elegans</i>. Finally, worm xenobiotic transport and metabolism was placed in an evolutionary context; key areas for future research highlighted; and implications for extrapolating <i>C. elegans</i> toxicity results to other species discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"24 2","pages":"51-94"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2021-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10937404.2021.1884921","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25392781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}