Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, 2017 Kemper Hall, University of California, Davis, California 95616, USA.
Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2012 Oct;8(4):723-30. doi: 10.1002/ieam.1305. Epub 2012 May 17.
The desire to reduce human exposure to toxic chemicals associated with consumer products that are marketed globally demands the creation of comparative toxicity assessment tools that are based on uniform thresholds of acceptable risks and guidelines for materials use across international boundaries. The Toxic Potential Indicator (TPI) is a quantitative model based on European Union (EU) regulatory standards for toxicity and environmental quality. Here, we describe a version of TPI that we developed with US regulatory thresholds for environmental and human health impacts of toxic materials. The customized US-based TPI (USTPI) model integrates occupational permissible exposure limits (PELs), carcinogen categories based on the scheme of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and median effect concentration for acute aquatic toxicity (EC50s). As a case study, we compare calculated scores for EU-based TPI (EUTPI) and USTPI for a large group of chemicals including 578 substances listed in the US Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). Statistical analyses show that the median difference between USTPI and EUTPI scores do not approximate to zero, implying a general discrepancy in TPI score results. Comparison of chemical ranking with Spearman's correlation coefficient suggests a positive but imperfect rank correlation. Although some discrepancies between EUTPI and USTPI may be explained by missing toxicity information in some regulatory categories, disparities between the 2 models are associated mostly with different input parameters, i.e., different regulatory thresholds and guidelines. These results demonstrate that regional differences in regulatory thresholds for material toxicity may compromise the ideals of international agreements, such as the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals, and emphasis needs to be placed on eliminating inconsistencies in hazard assessment frameworks for substances.
人类接触与全球销售的消费品相关的有毒化学物质的愿望,要求创建基于统一可接受风险阈值和跨国界材料使用指南的比较毒性评估工具。毒性潜能指标(TPI)是一种基于欧盟(EU)毒性和环境质量监管标准的定量模型。在这里,我们描述了一种 TPI 版本,它是基于美国对有毒物质的环境和人类健康影响的监管阈值开发的。基于美国的定制 TPI(USTPI)模型整合了职业可允许暴露限值(PELs)、基于国际癌症研究机构(IARC)方案的致癌物类别以及急性水生毒性的中值效应浓度(EC50s)。作为一个案例研究,我们比较了 EU 基于 TPI(EUTPI)和 USTPI 对一大组化学物质的计算得分,其中包括美国有毒物质释放清单(TRI)中列出的 578 种物质。统计分析表明,USTPI 和 EUTPI 得分的中位数差异不接近零,这意味着 TPI 得分结果存在普遍差异。化学物质排名的比较与斯皮尔曼相关系数表明存在正相关但不完美的相关性。尽管 EUTPI 和 USTPI 之间的一些差异可能可以用某些监管类别中的毒性信息缺失来解释,但这两种模型之间的差异主要与不同的输入参数有关,即不同的监管阈值和指南。这些结果表明,材料毒性的监管阈值的区域差异可能会影响国际协议的理想,例如全球化学品统一分类和标签制度(GHS),并且需要强调消除物质危害评估框架中的不一致性。