Suppr超能文献

对被动剂量测定法测量得出的吸收剂量估计值与生物监测得出的吸收剂量估计值进行比较评估:暴露监测方法的验证。

Comparative evaluation of absorbed dose estimates derived from passive dosimetry measurements to those derived from biological monitoring: validation of exposure monitoring methodologies.

作者信息

Ross John, Chester Graham, Driver Jeffrey, Lunchick Curt, Holden Larry, Rosenheck Leah, Barnekow Dave

机构信息

infoscientific.com, Inc., Carmichael, California, USA.

出版信息

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2008 Mar;18(2):211-30. doi: 10.1038/sj.jes.7500591. Epub 2007 Jun 27.

Abstract

Passive dosimetry (PD) methods for measuring and estimating exposure to agricultural workers (i.e., persons handling agricultural chemicals and working in treated crops) have been in use since the 1950s. A large number of studies were conducted in the 1950s through 1970s to characterize exposure. Since the 1980s quantitative dermal PD methods are used in conjunction with inhalation PD methods to measure whole-body exposure. These exposure or absorbed dose estimates are then compared to "no effect" exposure levels for hazards identified in toxicology studies, and have become the standard for risk assessment for regulatory agencies. The PD methods used have never been validated. Validation in the context of human exposure monitoring methods means that a method has been shown to measure accurately a delivered dose in humans. The most practical alternative to isolating parts of the body for validating recovery methods is to utilize field exposure studies in which concurrent or consecutive measurements of exposure and absorbed dose have been made with PD and biomonitoring in the same cohorts of individuals. This ensures that a direct comparison can be made between the two estimates of absorbed dose, one derived from PD and the other from biomonitoring. There are several studies available (published and proprietary) employing both of these approaches. Reports involving 14 concurrent or consecutive PD-biomonitoring studies were quantitatively evaluated with 18 different methods of application or reentry scenarios for eight different active ingredients for which measured human kinetics and dermal absorption data existed. This evaluation demonstrated that the total absorbed dose estimated using PD for important handler and reentry scenarios is generally similar to the measurements for those same scenarios made using human urinary biomonitoring methods. The statistical analysis of individual worker PD:biomonitoring ratios showed them to be significantly correlated in these studies. The PD techniques currently employed yield a reproducible, standard methodology that is valid and reliably quantifies exposure.

摘要

自20世纪50年代以来,被动剂量测定法(PD)一直被用于测量和估算农业工人(即接触农用化学品并在施药作物中工作的人员)的暴露情况。20世纪50年代至70年代进行了大量研究以描述暴露特征。自20世纪80年代以来,定量皮肤PD方法与吸入PD方法结合使用以测量全身暴露。然后将这些暴露或吸收剂量估计值与毒理学研究中确定的危害的“无影响”暴露水平进行比较,并已成为监管机构风险评估的标准。所使用的PD方法从未经过验证。在人体暴露监测方法的背景下,验证意味着一种方法已被证明能够准确测量人体中的给药剂量。验证回收方法时,最实际的替代方法是利用现场暴露研究,在同一组个体中同时或连续进行暴露和吸收剂量的测量,并结合被动剂量测定法和生物监测。这确保了可以直接比较吸收剂量的两种估计值,一种来自被动剂量测定法,另一种来自生物监测。有几项研究(已发表的和专有的)采用了这两种方法。对涉及14项同时或连续的被动剂量测定法-生物监测研究的报告进行了定量评估,这些研究针对8种不同的活性成分,采用了18种不同的施用或再进入场景,这些活性成分有已测量的人体动力学和皮肤吸收数据。该评估表明,对于重要的操作人员和再进入场景,使用被动剂量测定法估计的总吸收剂量通常与使用人体尿液生物监测方法对相同场景的测量结果相似。对个体工人被动剂量测定法与生物监测比率的统计分析表明,在这些研究中它们具有显著相关性。目前采用的被动剂量测定技术产生了一种可重复的标准方法,该方法有效且可靠地量化了暴露情况。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验