A probabilistic risk assessment approach used to prioritize chemical constituents in mainstream smoke of cigarettes sold in China

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

Volumn 62, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 355-362

  Xie, Jianping ^a   Marano, Kristin M ^b   Wilson, Cody L ^b   Liu, Huimin ^a   Gan, Huamin ^b   Xie, Fuwei ^a   Naufal, Ziad S ^b  

^a Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute   (China)

^b R J REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer risk; China; Cigarette; Cigarette mainstream smoke; Hazard quotient; Margin of exposure; Probabilistic; Risk assessment; Risk management; Tobacco

Indexed keywords

1,3 BUTADIENE; 2 NAPHTHYLAMINE; 4 (METHYLNITROSAMINO) 1 (3 PYRIDYL) 1 BUTANONE; 4 BIPHENYLAMINE; ACETALDEHYDE; ACRYLONITRILE; ARSENIC; BENZENE; BENZO[A]PYRENE; CADMIUM; CHROMIUM; CIGARETTE MAINSTREAM SMOKE; FORMALDEHYDE; ISOPRENE; LEAD; NITROSONORNICOTINE; PYRIDINE; QUINOLINE; TOXIC SUBSTANCE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS; ARTICLE; CHEMICAL ANALYSIS; CHEMICAL COMPOSITION; CHINA; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPOSURE; HAZARD QUOTIENT; HEALTH HAZARD; INCREMENTAL LIFETIME CANCER RISK; MARGIN OF EXPOSURE; MARKETING; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CHINA; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SMOKE; TOBACCO;

NICOTIANA TABACUM;

EID: 84857355796     PISSN: 02732300     EISSN: 10960295     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2011.10.017     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Andersen M.E. Toxicokinetic modeling and its applications in chemical risk assessment. Toxicol. Lett. 2003, 138(1-2):9-27.
2. Benford D., Bolger P.M., Carthew P., Coulet M., DiNovi M., Leblanc J.C., Renwick A.G., Setzer W., Schlatter J., Smith B., Slob W., Williams G., Wildemann T. Application of the margin of exposure (MOE) approach to substances in food that are genotoxic and carcinogenic. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2010, 48(Suppl. 1):S2-S24.
3. Borgerding M., Klus H. Analysis of complex mixtures - cigarette smoke. Exp. Toxicol. Pathol. 2005, 57 Suppl. 1:43-73.
4. Burns D.M., Dybing E., Gray N., Hecht S., Anderson C., Sanner T., O'Connor R., Djordjevic M., Dresler C., Hainaut P., Jarvis M., Opperhuizen A., Straif K. Mandated lowering of toxicants in cigarette smoke: a description of the World Health Organization TobReg proposal. Tob. Control 2008, 17(2):132-141.
5. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Chronic reference exposure levels. (accessed 18.02.11.). http://oehha.ca.gov/air/allrels.html.
6. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), 2003. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. The Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. (accessed 23.02.11.). http://oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/hraguidefinal.html.
7. Government of Canada, 2000. Tobacco reporting regulations. SOR/2000-273. Canada Gazette Part II 134(15) July 19. (accessed 18.02.11.). http://canadagazette.gc.ca/archives/p2/2000/2000-07-19/html/sor-dors273-eng.html.
8. China Health and Nutrition Survey (CHNS), 2006. (accessed 18.02.11). http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/china.
9. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), 2005. Opinion of the Scientific Committee on a request from EFSA related to a harmonized approach for risk assessment of substances which are both genotoxic and carcinogenic. Question number: EFSA-Q-2004-020. (accessed 18.02.11.). http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/scdoc/282.htm.
10. Filipsson M., öberg T., Bergbäck B. Variability and uncertainty in Swedish exposure factors for use in quantitative exposure assessments. Risk Anal. 2011, 31(1):108-119.
11. Health Canada, 2006. Constituents and emissions reported for cigarettes sold in Canada - 2004. A backgrounder. (accessed 18.02.11.). http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hc-ps/alt_formats/hecs-sesc/pdf/tobac-tabac/legislation/reg/indust/constitu-eng.pdf.
12. Health Canada, 2007. Tobacco reporting regulations - methods. (accessed 18.02.11.). http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hc-ps/tobac-tabac/legislation/reg/indust/method/index-eng.php#main.
13. Fowles J., Dybing E. Application of toxicological risk assessment principles to the chemical constituents of cigarette smoke. Tob. Control 2003, 12:424-430.
14. Science and decisions: advancing risk assessment 2008, National Research Council (NRC), The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
15. Naufal Z., Kathman S., Wilson C. Bayesian derivation of an oral cancer slope factor distribution for 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK). Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2009, 55(1):69-75.
16. Nelson P.R., Chen P., Dixon M., Steichen T. A survey of mouth level exposure to cigarette smoke in the United States. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2010, 23:12-23. 10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.10.001.
17. Nestorov I. Whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic models. Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 2007, 3(2):235-249.
18. Pankow J.F., Watanabe K.H., Toccalino P.L., Luo W., Austin D.F. Calculated cancer risks for conventional and " Potentially Reduced Exposure Product" cigarettes. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2007, 16(3):584-592.
19. Rodgman A., Perfetti T.A. The Chemical Components of Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke 2009, Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton.
20. Sonich-Mullin C., Fielder R., Wiltse J., Baetcke K., Dempsey J., Fenner-Crisp P., Grant D., Hartley M., Knaap A., Kroese D., Mangelsdorf I., Meek E., Rice J.M., Younes M. International Program on Chemical Safety IPCS conceptual framework for evaluating a mode of action for chemical carcinogenesis. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2001, 34(2):146-152.
21. US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). (accessed 18.02.11.). http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/index.html.
22. US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2000. Methodology for deriving ambient water quality criteria for the protection of human health. EPA-822-B-00-004. Office of Science and Technology, Office of Water, Washington, DC. (accessed 18.02.11.). http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/humanhealth/method/complete.pdf.
23. US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. I. Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part A) Interim Final. EPA 540-1-89-002. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, DC. (accessed 18.02.11). http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/ragsa/.
24. Watanabe K.H., Djordjevic M.V., Stellman S.D., Toccalino P.L., Austin D.F., Pankow J.F. Incremental lifetime cancer risks computed for benzo[a]pyrene and two tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines in mainstream cigarette smoke compared with lung cancer risks derived from epidemiologic data. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2009, 55(2):123-133.
25. Wipfli H., Samet J.M. Global economic and health benefits of tobacco control: part 1. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 2009, 86(3):263-271.
26. World Health Organization (WHO), 2006. Life tables for member states. China. (accessed 01.01.10.). http://www.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/mortality_life_tables/en/.
27. Xiao L., Yang J., Wan X., Yang G. What is the prevalence of smoking in China. Chin. J. Epidemiol. 2009, 30(1):30-33.
28. Xie J.P., Liu H.M., Zhu M.X., Zhong K.J., Dai Y., Du W., Xie F.W., Miao M.M., Deng J.Y., Nie C., Shao X.G., Hu Q.Y., Yao X.J., Li Z., Zhang X.B. Development of a novel hazard index of mainstream cigarette smoke and its application on risk evaluation of cigarette products. Tob. Sci. Technol. 2009, 2:5-15.