The Scientific Basis of Uncertainty Factors Used in Setting Occupational Exposure Limits

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene

Volumn 12, Issue , 2015, Pages S55-S68

  Dankovic, D A ^a   Naumann, B D ^b   Maier, A ^c   Dourson, M L ^c   Levy, L S ^d  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH   (United States)

^b MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

adjustment factor; occupational exposure; risk assessment; uncertainty factor

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; HUMAN; NO-OBSERVED-ADVERSE-EFFECT LEVEL; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; PROCEDURES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; STANDARDS; TOXICOLOGY; UNCERTAINTY;

ANIMALS; HUMANS; NO-OBSERVED-ADVERSE-EFFECT LEVEL; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; TOXICOLOGY; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 84938382782     PISSN: 15459624     EISSN: 15459632     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15459624.2015.1060325     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Lehman A.J, O.G. Fitzhugh.: 100-Fold margin of safety. Assoc. Food Drug Off. U. S. Q. Bull. 18: 33-35 (1954).
2. Fairhurst S.: The uncertainty factor in the setting of occupational exposure limits. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 39: 375-385 (1995).
3. Vermeire, T., H. Stevenson., M.N. Pieters., M. Rennen., W. Slob, B.C. Hakkert.: Assessment factors for human health risk assessment: a discussion paper. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 29 (5): 439-490 (1999).
4. Zielhuis, R.L, F.W. van der Kreek.: The use of a safety factor in setting health based permissible levels for occupational exposure. I. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 42: 191-201 (1979).
5. Sargent, E.V, G.D. Kirk.: Establishing airborne exposure control limits in the pharmaceutical industry. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 49 (6): 309-313 (1988).
6. Agius, R.: Occupational exposure limits for therapeutic substances. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 33: 555-562 (1989).
7. Galer, D.M., H.W. Leung., R.G. Sussman, R.J. Trzos.: Scientific and practical considerations for the development of occupational exposure limits (OELs) for chemical substances. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 15: 291-306 (1992).
8. Nielsen, G.D, S. Øvrebø.: Background, approaches and recent trends for setting health-based occupational exposure limits: A minireview. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 51: 253-269 (2008).
9. Henschler, D.: Evaluation of adverse effects in the standard-setting process. Toxicol. Lett. 64-65. Spec No:53-7 (1992).
10. National Research Council (NRC).: Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press 2009.
11. Wheeler, M.W., R. Park., A.J. Bailer, C. Whittaker.: Historical context and recent advances in exposure-response estimation for deriving occupational exposure limits. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12(S1):S7-S17.
12. Kuempel, E., L. Sweeney, J. Morris, and A. Jarabek.: Advances in inhalation dosimetry models and methods for occupational risk assessment and exposure limit derivation. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12(S1):S18-S40.
13. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).: Methods for Derivation of Inhalation Reference Concentrations and Application of Inhalation Dosimetry. Washington, D.C.: Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. EPA/600/8-90-066F 1994.
14. Haber, L, A. Maier.: Scientific Criteria Used for the Development of Occupational Exposure Limits for Metals and Other Mining-Related Chemicals. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 36: 262-279 (2002).
15. Deveau, M., C.-P. Chen., G. Johansen., et al.: The global landscape of occupational exposure limits-Implementation of harmonization principles to guide limit selection. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12(S1): S127-S144 (2015).
16. Dourson, M.L, Stara, J.F.: Regulatory history and experimental support of uncertainty (safety) factors. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 3: 224-238 (1983).
17. Naumann, B.D, P.A. Weideman.: Scientific basis for uncertainty factors used to establish occupational exposure limits for pharmaceutical active ingredients. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 1: 590-613 (1995).
18. Dourson, M.L., S.P. Felter, D. Robinson.: Evolution of science-based uncertainty factors in noncancer risk assessment. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 24: 108-120 (1996).
19. World Health Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety (WHO/IPCS).: Assessing Human Health Risk of Chemicals: The Derivation of Guidance Values for Health-Based Exposure Limits. Environmental Health Criteria 170. Geneva: World Health Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety, 1994.
20. World Health Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety (WHO/IPCS).: Chemical-Specific Adjustment Factors for Interspecies Differences and Human Variability: Guidance Document for Use of Data in Dose/Concentration Assessment. IPCS Harmonization Project Document 2, Geneva: World Health Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety 2005;. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2005/9241546786-eng.pdf (accessed May 6, 2010).
21. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).: A review of the Reference Dose (RfD) and Reference Concentration (RfC) processes. Risk Assessment Forum. EPA/630/P-02/002F, December 2002.
22. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).: Guidance for Industry: Estimating the Maximum Safe Starting Dose in Initial Clinical Trials for Therapeutics in Adult Healthy Volunteers. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), 2005; http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/index.htm (accessed October 18, 2011).
23. Davidson, I.W.E., J.C. Parker, R.P. Beliles.: Biological basis for extrapolation across mammalian species. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 6: 211-237 (1986).
24. Mordenti, J, W. Chappell.: The use of interspecies scaling in toxicokinetics. In: Toxicokinetics and New Drug Development, A. Yacobi., J.P. Skelly, V.K. Batra. (eds.). New York, Pergamon Press, 1989. pp. 42-96.
25. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).: Recommended Use of Body Weight ¾ as the Default Method in Derivation of the Oral Reference Dose,. Office of the Science Advisor, Risk Assessment Forum. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2005).
26. Bokkers, B.G.H, W. Slob.: Deriving a data-based interspecies assessment factor using the NOAEL and the benchmark dose approach. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 37: 355-373 (2007).
27. Escher, S.E., M. Batke., S. Hoffmann-Doerr., H. Messinger, I. Mangelsdorf.: Interspecies extrapolation based on the RepDose database-A probabilistic approach. Tox. Lett. 218: 159-165 (2013).
28. Gloede, E., J.A. Cichocki., J.B. Baldino, J.B. Morris.: A validated hybrid computational fluid dynamics-physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for respiratory tract vapor absorption in the human and rat and its application to inhalation dosimetry of diacetyl. Toxicol. Sci. 123 (1): 231-246 (2011).
29. Johansson, M., G. Johanson, M. Öberg.: How are asthmatics included in the derivation of guideline values for emergency planning and response Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 63: 461-470 (2012).
30. Calabrese, E.J.: Uncertainty factors and interindividual variation. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 5: 190-196 (1985).
31. Renwick, A.G, N.R. Lazarus.: Human variability and noncancer risk assessment-An analysis of the default uncertainty factor. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 27: 3-20 (1998).
32. Dourson, M.L., G. Charnley, R. Scheuplein.: Differential sensitivity of children and adults to chemical toxicity: II. Risk and regulation. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 35: 448-467 (2002).
33. Institute for Environment and Health (IEH).: Variability and Susceptibility in Human Response to Occupational Exposure to Chemicals in the UK. Report R13. Leicester, UK: Medical Research Council Institute for Environment and Health, 2002.
34. Falk-Filipsson, A., A. Hanberg., K. Victorin., M. Warholm, M. Wallén.: Assessment factors-Applications in health risk assessment of chemicals. Environ. Res. 104: 108-127 (2007).
35. Schenk, L, G. Johanson.: Use of uncertainty factors by the SCOEL in their derivation of health-based occupational exposure limits. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 40: 791-798, 2010.
36. Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (SCOEL).: Methodology for the Derivation of Occupational Exposure Limits. Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (SCOEL). Key Documentation (version 7 2013); http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServletdocId=4526&langId=en (accessed September 10, 2013).
37. Monson, R.R.: Observations on the healthy worker effect. J. Occup. Med. 28: 425-433 (1981).
38. Li, C.-Y, E.-C. Sung.: A review of the healthy worker effect in occupational epidemiology. Occup. Med. 49 (4): 225-229 (1999).
39. Schulte, P.A., C.Whittaker, C.P. Curran.: Considerations of using genetic and epigenetic Information in occupational health risk assessment and standard setting. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12(S1): S69-S81.
40. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).: Guidance on Information Requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment; Available from http://echa. europa. eu/) (2008).
41. Naumann, B.D., K.C. Silverman., R. Dixit., E.C. Faria, E.V. Sargent.: Case studies of categorical data-derived adjustment factors. Human Ecol. Risk Assess. 7 (1): 61-105 (2001).
42. Silverman, K.C., B.D. Naumann., D.J. Holder., et al.: Establishing data-derived adjustment factors from published pharmaceutical clinical trial data. Human Ecol. Risk Assess. 5 (5): 1059-1089 (1999).
43. Weil, C.S.: Statistics vs. safety factors and scientific judgment in the evaluation of safety for man. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 21: 454-463 (1972).
44. Lewis, S.C.: Reducing uncertainty with adjustment factors. In: Improvements in quantitative noncancer risk assessment (A symposium overview). Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 20: 1-14 (1993).
45. Abdel-Rahman, M.S, A.M. Kadry.: Studies on the use of uncertainty factors in deriving RfDs. Human Ecol. Risk Assess. 1 (5): 614-624 (1995).
46. Weil, C.S, D.D. McCollister.: Relationship between short-and long-term feeding studies in designing an effective toxicity test. Agr. Food Chem. 11 (6): 86-491 (1963).
47. McNamara, B.P.: Concepts in health evaluation of commercial and industrial chemicals. In New Concepts in Safety Evaluation, M.A. Mehlman., R.E. Shapiro, H. Blumenthal. (eds.). Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere, 1976. pp. 61-140.
48. Woutersen, R.A., H.P. Til, V.J. Feron.: Sub-acute versus sub-chronic oral toxicity study in rats: comparative study of 82 compounds. J. of Appl. Toxicol. 4 (5): 277-280 (1984).
49. Lewis, S.C., J.R. Lynch, A.I. Nikiforov.: A new approach to deriving community exposure guidelines from "no-observed-adverse-effect levels." Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 11: 314-330 (1990).
50. Lewis, S.C, C.S. Nessel.: Extrapolating subchronic test results to estimate chronic no-observed-adverse-effect levels: Factors of 10 are larger than necessary. Toxicologist 14 (1): 401 (1994).
51. Kadry, A.M., G.A Skowronski, M.S. Abdel-Rahman.: Evaluation of the use of uncertainty factors in deriving RfDs for some chlorinated compounds. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health 44: 83-95 (1995).
52. Dourson, M.L., L.A. Knauf, J.C. Swartout.: On Reference Dose (RfD) and its underlying toxicity data base. Toxicol. Industr. Health. 8 (3): 171-189 (1992).
53. Interdepartmental Group on Health Risks from Chemicals (IGHRC).: Guideline on Route-to-Route Toxicity Data when Assessing Health Risks of Chemicals. Published by the Institute of Environment and Health 2006; http://ieh.cranfield.ac.uk/ighrc/pdf/cr%20reports/cr12%5b1%5d%5b1%5d.pdf (accessed September 29, 2015).
54. Gaffney S.H, D.J. Paustenbach.: A proposed approach for setting occupational exposure limits for sensory irritants based on chemosensory models. Ann Occup Hyg. 51:345-356 (2007).
55. Naumann, B.D., P.A. Weideman., R. Sarangapani., S. Hu., R. Dixit, E.V. Sargent.: Investigations of the use of bioavailability data to adjust occupational exposure limits for active pharmaceutical ingredients. Toxicol. Sci. 112 (1): 196-210 (2009).
56. Calabrese, E.J. and C.E. Gilbert.: Lack of total independence of uncertainty factors (UFs): Implications for the size of the total uncertainty factor. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 17: 44-51 (1993).
57. Swartout, J.C., P.S. Price., M.L. Dourson., H.L. Carlson-Lynch, R.E. Keenan.: A Probabilistic Framework for the Reference Dose (Probabilistic RfD). Risk Anal. 18: 271-282 (1998).
58. Gaylor, D.W, R.L. Kodell.: Percentiles of the product of uncertainty factors for establishing probabilistic reference doses. Risk Anal. 20: 245-250 (2000).
59. Pelekis, M., M.J. Nicolich, J.S. Gauthier.: Probabilistic framework for the estimation of the adult and child toxicokinetic intraspecies uncertainty factors. Risk Anal. 23: 1239-1255 (2003).
60. Hasegawa, R., M. Hirata-Koizumi., M.L. Dourson. et al.: Proposal of new uncertainty factor application to derive tolerable daily intake. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 58: 237-242 (2010).
61. Waters, M., L. McKernan., A. Maier., M. Jayjock., V. Schaeffer, L. Brosseau.: Exposure estimation and interpretation of occupational risk: Enhanced information for the occupational risk manager. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 12(S1): S99-S111.
62. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).: Current Intelligence Bulletin 66: Derivation of Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH) Values. Cincinnati, OH: US Department of Health and Human Services, 2013. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication 2014-100.
63. Vermeire, T., M. Pieters., M. Rennen, P. Bos.: Probabilistic Assessment Factors for Human Health Risk Assessment-A Practical Guide. RIVM report 601516 005/TNO report V3489. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) (in cooperation with TNO Nutrition and Food Research), Bilthoven, The Netherlands, 2001.
64. Renwick, A.G.: Safety factors and establishment of acceptable daily intakes. Food Add. Contamin. 8 (2): 135-150 (1991).
65. Renwick, A.G.: Data-derived safety factors for the evaluation of food additives and environmental contaminants. Food Add. Contam. 10 (3): 275-305 (1993).
66. Renwick, A.G.: Subdivision of uncertainty factors to allow for toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics. Human Ecol. Risk Assess. 5 (5): 1035-1050 (1999).
67. World Health Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety (WHO/IPCS).: Guidance Document for the Use of Data in Development of Chemical Specific Adjustment Factors (CSAFs) for Interspecies Differences and Human Variability in Dose/Concentration Response Assessment. Geneva: World Health Organization, International Programme on Chemical Safety 2001; available at http://www.who.int/ipcs/methods/harmonization/areas/uncertainty/en/(accessed August 9, 2014).
68. Meek, B., E. Ohanian., A. Renwick., et al.: Guidelines for application of chemical-specific adjustment factors (CSAFs) in dose/concentration-response assessment. Comm. Toxicol. 7: 575-590 (2001).
69. Naumann, B.D., D.G. Dolan, E.V. Sargent.: Rationale for the chemical-specific adjustment factors used to derive an occupational exposure limit for timolol maleate. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 10: 99-111 (2004).
70. Hattis, D., L. Erdreich., M. Ballew.: Human variability in susceptibility to toxic chemicals-a preliminary analysis of pharmacokinetic data from normal volunteers. Risk Anal. 7 (4): 415-426 (1987).
71. Sargent, E.V., B.D. Naumann., D.G. Dolan., E.C. Faria, L. Schulman.: The importance of human data in the establishment of occupational exposure limits. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 8 (4): 805-822 (2002).
72. Naumann, B.D., P.A. Weideman., R. Dixit., S.J. Grossman., C.F. Shen, E.V. Sargent.: Use of toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic data to reduce uncertainties when setting occupational exposure limits for pharmaceuticals. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 3 (4): 555-565 (1997).