Use of a Statistical Model to Predict the Potential for Repeated Dose and Developmental Toxicity of Dermally Administered Crude Oil and Relation to Reproductive Toxicity

International Journal of Toxicology

Volumn 33, Issue , 2014, Pages 17S-27S

  McKee, Richard H ^a   Nicolich, Mark ^b   Roy, Timothy ^c,d   White, Russell ^e   Daughtrey, Wayne C ^a  

^a EXXONMOBIL UPSTREAM RESEARCH COMPANY   (United States)

^b Lambertville ^*  (United States)

^c Port Royal Research   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT   (United States)

^e AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

CAS number 8002 05 9; crude oil; developmental toxicity; petroleum; repeated dose toxicity

Indexed keywords

PETROLEUM; POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBON;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CAS NUMBER 8002-05-9; DANGEROUS GOODS; DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFECT; FEMALE; INTRADERMAL DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MALE; RAT; REPEATED-DOSE TOXICITY; REPRODUCTION; STANDARD; STATISTICAL MODEL; TOXICITY TESTING;

CAS NUMBER 8002-05-9; CRUDE OIL; DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY; PETROLEUM; REPEATED-DOSE TOXICITY;

ADMINISTRATION, CUTANEOUS; ANIMALS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; FEMALE; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PETROLEUM; POLYCYCLIC HYDROCARBONS, AROMATIC; RATS; REPRODUCTION; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 84907813756     PISSN: 10915818     EISSN: 1092874X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1091581813504226     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. US EPA. Data collection and development on high production volume (HPV) chemicals. Federal Register. 2000; 65(248):81686.
2. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Hydrogen Sulfide. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Services; 2006.
3. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Methyl Mercaptan. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Services; 1992.
4. IARC. Crude oil in Occupational Exposures in Petroleum Refining; Crude Oil and Major Petroleum Fuels. Vol 45. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 1998.
5. Renne R, Smith L, Mahlum D. Epidermal carcinogenicity of some crude fossil fuels in mice: a preliminary report. In: Mahlum D, Gray R, Felix W, eds. Coal Conversion and the Environment. Battelle Conference Number 801039. Springfield, IL: NTIS; 1981: 471-481.
6. Lewis S, King R, Cragg S, Hillman D. Skin carcinogenic potential of petroleum hydrocarbons: 2. Carcinogenesis of crude oil, distillate fractions and chemical class separations. In: Mehlman M, ed. Advances in Modern Environmental Toxicology. Vol 6. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Scientific Publishers, Inc; 1984: 139–150.
7. McKee R, Stubblefield W, Lewis S, Scala R, Simon G, DePass L. Evaluation of the dermal carcinogenic potential of tar sands bitumen-derived liquids. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1986; 7(2):228–235.
8. Lockhard J, Prater J, Viau C, Enoch H, Sabharwal P. Comparative studies of the genotoxic properties of Eastern and Western U.S. shale oils, crude petroleum and coal-derived oil. Mutat Res. 1982; 102(3):221–235.
9. Cragg S, Conaway C, MacGregor J. Lack of concordance of the Salmonella/microsome assay with the mouse dermal carcinogenesis bioassay for complex petroleum mixtures. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1985; 5(2):382–390.
10. Leighton F. The systemic toxicity of Prudhoe Bay crude and other petroleum oils to CD-1 mice. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 1990; 19(2):257–262.
11. Feuston M, Mackerer C, Schreiner C, Hamilton C. Systemic toxicity of dermally applied crude oils in rats. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1997; 51(4):387–399.
12. Khan S, Martin M, Payne J, Rahimtula A. Embryotoxic evaluation of a Prudhoe Bay crude oil in rats. Toxicol Lett. 1987; 38(1-2):109–114.
13. Feuston M, Hamilton C, Schreiner C, Mackerer C. Developmental toxicity of dermally applied crude oil in rats. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1997; 52(1):79–93.
14. Feuston M, Low L, Hamilton C, Mackerer C. Correlation of systemic and developmental toxicities with chemical component classes of refinery streams. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1994; 22(4):622–630.
15. Nicolich M, Simpson B, Murray J, Roth R, Gray T. The development of statistical models to determine the relationship between the aromatic ring class content and repeat-dose and developmental toxicities of high boiling petroleum substances [published online December 13, 2012]. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2012.
16. Murray J, Roth R, Nicolich M, Gray T, Simpson B. The relationship between developmental toxicity and aromatic ring class content of high boiling petroleum substances [published online May 13, 2013]. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2013.
17. Roth R, Simpson B, Nicolich M, Murray R, Gray T. The relationship between repeat dose toxicity and the aromatic ring class content of high boiling petroleum substances [published online June 7, 2013]. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2013.
18. American Petroleum Institute. High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Challenge Program. Crude Oil Category. Category Assessment Document. American Petroleum Institute, Petroleum HPV Testing Group. Consortium Registration Number 1100997; 2012. Petroleumhpv.org. Accessed January 14, 2011.
19. Wilhelm S, Liang L, Cussen D, Kirchgessner D. Mercury in crude oil processed in the United States (2004). Environ Sci Technol. 2007; 41(13):4509–4514.
20. Roy T, Johnson S, Blackburn G, Deitch R, Schreiner C, Mackerer C. Estimation of mutagenic and dermal carcinogenic activities of petroleum fractions based on polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon content. In: Cooke M, Dennis A, eds. Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons: A Decade of Progress. 10th International Symposium. Columbus, OH: Battelle Press; 1985: 809–824.
21. Roy T, Johnson S, Blackburn G, Mackerer C. Correlation of mutagenic and dermal carcinogenic activities of mineral oils with polycyclic aromatic content. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1988; 10(3):466–476.
22. Gray T, Simpson B, Nicolich M, et al. Assessing the mammalian toxicity of high boiling petroleum substances under the rubric of the HPV Program [published online December 14, 2012]. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2012.
23. Crump K. A new method for determining allowable daily intakes. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1984; 4(5):854–871.
24. Gephart L, Salminen W, Nicolich M, Pelekis M. Evaluation of subchronic toxicity data using the benchmark dose approach. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2001; 33(1):37–59.
25. US EPA, Benchmark Dose Software 2.1.2 [ computer program ]. Version 2.1.2.60. http://www.epa.gov/ncea/bmds/, 2010. Accessed May 19, 2011.
26. ASTM Standard Method E1687-95 (volume 11.03. Standard Test Method for Determining Carcinogenic Potential of Virgin Base Oils in Metal Working Fluids. West Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, Occupational Health and Safety; 2004.
27. EPA. http://www.epa.gov/chemtrk/pubs/general/sidsappb.htm. Accessed September 18, 2013.
28. Orisakwe O, Akumka D, Njan A, Afonne O. Testicular toxicity of Nigerian bonny light crude oil in male albino rats. Reprod Toxicol. 2004; 18(3):439–442.
29. Obidike I, Maduabuchi I, Olumuyiwa S. Testicular morphology and cauda epididymal sperm reserves of male rats exposed to Nigerian Qua Iboe Brent crude oil. J Vet Sci. 2007; 8(1):1–5.
30. Hoberman A, Christian M, Roth R, Lovre S, Koschier F. Reproductive toxicity study of clarified slurry oil in the rat. J Am Coll Toxicol. 1995; 14(2):119–128.
31. Hoberman A, Christian M, Lovre S, Roth R, Koschier F. Developmental toxicity study of clarified slurry oil in the rat. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1995; 28(1):34–40.
32. IPIECA. Guidance on the Application of Globally Harmonized System (GHS) criteria to petroleum substances. www.ipieca.org. Published June 17, 2010. Accessed September 18, 2013.
33. Clark C, McKee R, Freeman J, et al. A GHS-consistent approach to health hazard classification of petroleum substances, a class of UVCB substances. [published online ahead of print September 8, 2013]. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2013.