Dennison James E, Bigelow Philip L, Mumtaz Moiz M, Andersen Melvin E, Dobrev Ivan D, Yang Raymond S H
Quantitative and Computational Toxicology Group, Center for Environmental Toxicology and Technology, Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, Colorado 80523, USA.
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2005 Mar;2(3):127-35. doi: 10.1080/15459620590916198.
Under OSHA and American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) guidelines, the mixture formula (unity calculation) provides a method for evaluating exposures to mixtures of chemicals that cause similar toxicities. According to the formula, if exposures are reduced in proportion to the number of chemicals and their respective exposure limits, the overall exposure is acceptable. This approach assumes that responses are additive, which is not the case when pharmacokinetic interactions occur. To determine the validity of the additivity assumption, we performed unity calculations for a variety of exposures to toluene, ethylbenzene, and/or xylene using the concentration of each chemical in blood in the calculation instead of the inhaled concentration. The blood concentrations were predicted using a validated physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model to allow exploration of a variety of exposure scenarios. In addition, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and ACGIH occupational exposure limits were largely based on studies of humans or animals that were resting during exposure. The PBPK model was also used to determine the increased concentration of chemicals in the blood when employees were exercising or performing manual work. At rest, a modest overexposure occurs due to pharmacokinetic interactions when exposure is equal to levels where a unity calculation is 1.0 based on threshold limit values (TLVs). Under work load, however, internal exposure was 87%higher than provided by the TLVs. When exposures were controlled by a unity calculation based on permissible exposure limits (PELs), internal exposure was 2.9 and 4.6 times the exposures at the TLVs at rest and workload, respectively. If exposure was equal to PELs outright, internal exposure was 12.5 and 16 times the exposure at the TLVs at rest and workload, respectively. These analyses indicate the importance of (1) selecting appropriate exposure limits, (2) performing unity calculations, and (3) considering the effect of work load on internal doses, and they illustrate the utility of PBPK modeling in occupational health risk assessment.
根据美国职业安全与健康管理局(OSHA)和美国政府工业卫生学家会议(ACGIH)的指导方针,混合公式(统一计算)提供了一种评估对具有相似毒性的化学物质混合物暴露情况的方法。根据该公式,如果暴露量按照化学物质的数量及其各自的暴露限值成比例降低,那么总体暴露量就是可接受的。这种方法假定反应是相加的,但当发生药代动力学相互作用时并非如此。为了确定相加性假设的有效性,我们使用血液中每种化学物质的浓度而非吸入浓度,对各种甲苯、乙苯和/或二甲苯暴露情况进行了统一计算。使用经过验证的基于生理的药代动力学(PBPK)模型预测血液浓度,以便探索各种暴露场景。此外,职业安全与健康管理局和ACGIH的职业暴露限值很大程度上基于对暴露期间处于休息状态的人类或动物的研究。PBPK模型还用于确定员工在锻炼或从事体力工作时血液中化学物质浓度的增加情况。在休息时,当暴露量等于基于阈限值(TLV)统一计算为1.0的水平时,由于药代动力学相互作用会出现适度的过度暴露。然而,在工作负荷下,内部暴露比TLV所规定的水平高87%。当根据允许暴露限值(PEL)通过统一计算来控制暴露时,在休息和工作负荷状态下,内部暴露分别是TLV暴露量的2.9倍和4.6倍。如果暴露量直接等于PEL,在休息和工作负荷状态下,内部暴露分别是TLV暴露量的12.5倍和16倍。这些分析表明了(1)选择合适的暴露限值、(2)进行统一计算以及(3)考虑工作负荷对内部剂量的影响的重要性,并且它们说明了PBPK建模在职业健康风险评估中的实用性。