Campbell Jerry L, Linakis Matthew W, Porter Anna K, Rosen Emma M, Logan Perry W, Kleinschmidt Sarah E, Andres Kara L, Chang Sue, Taiwo Oyebode A, Olsen Geary W, Clewell Harvey J, Longnecker Matthew P
Ramboll Americas Engineering Solutions, Inc., 3214 Charles B. Root Wynd, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27612, United States.
Ann Work Expo Health. 2025 Feb 25;69(2):160-172. doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxae099.
Studies among workers with a wide range of exposure to perfluoroalkyl substances inform risk assessments. Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), a ubiquitous environmental contaminant, was recently examined in relation to mortality and cancer incidence in an occupationally exposed population by Alexander et al. in 2024. In that study, cumulative occupational exposure (mg/m3 PFOS-equivalents in air) was reconstructed using a job-exposure matrix and individual work history. While the exposure reconstruction had good face validity, an assessment of its performance in relation to serum PFOS levels would allow improved interpretation of the occupational epidemiology findings.
The objective of this study was to assess the validity of the exposure reconstruction used by Alexander et al. (2024).
A previous study by Olsen et al. (2003) measured serum PFOS levels in 1998 for 260 workers and because these workers were included in the epidemiologic study by Alexander et al. (2024), the study reported herein compared serum PFOS levels to those predicted using a simple compartmental pharmacokinetic model.
The Pearson correlation coefficient between the observed and pharmacokinetic model-predicted serum PFOS concentration was 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.84). The median ratio of predicted to observed serum concentrations was 12 (i.e. actual exposure was significantly less than predicted). The predicted serum PFOS concentrations were not sensitive to the parameters used in the pharmacokinetic model other than exposure concentration or absorption.
The model did not predict absolute exposure well, probably because of personal protective equipment use not being accounted for and absorption of PFOS or precursors being lower than modeled. On the other hand, the model did a reasonably good job of ranking the workers' exposure, thus classification of workers according to relative amount of cumulative PFOS-equivalents was reasonably accurate in the study by Alexander et al. (2024) when validated using the measured serum PFOS data.
针对广泛接触全氟烷基物质的工人开展的研究为风险评估提供了依据。全氟辛烷磺酸(PFOS)是一种普遍存在的环境污染物,2024年亚历山大等人针对职业暴露人群的死亡率和癌症发病率对其进行了研究。在该研究中,使用工作暴露矩阵和个人工作经历重建了累积职业暴露(空气中PFOS当量mg/m³)。虽然暴露重建具有良好的表面效度,但评估其与血清PFOS水平相关的表现将有助于更好地解释职业流行病学研究结果。
本研究的目的是评估亚历山大等人(2024年)使用的暴露重建方法的有效性。
奥尔森等人(2003年)之前的一项研究在1998年测量了260名工人的血清PFOS水平,由于这些工人被纳入了亚历山大等人(2024年)的流行病学研究,因此本研究将血清PFOS水平与使用简单房室药代动力学模型预测的水平进行了比较。
观察到的血清PFOS浓度与药代动力学模型预测值之间的Pearson相关系数为0.80(95%置信区间,0.75至0.84)。预测血清浓度与观察到的血清浓度的中位数比值为12(即实际暴露显著低于预测值)。预测的血清PFOS浓度对药代动力学模型中除暴露浓度或吸收外使用的参数不敏感。
该模型对绝对暴露的预测效果不佳,可能是因为未考虑个人防护设备的使用情况,且PFOS或其前体的吸收低于模型设定。另一方面,该模型在对工人的暴露进行排序方面表现较好,因此在亚历山大等人(2024年)的研究中,当使用实测血清PFOS数据进行验证时,根据累积PFOS当量的相对量对工人进行分类的结果相当准确。