Jeffrey Driver

Soil adherence to human skin

Dermal exposure to soils contaminated with toxic chemicals represents a potential public health hazard. These soils, contaminated with chemicals such as PCBs and dioxins, may be found at various locations throughout the US. Furthermore, dermal contact with pesticide-containing particles and contaminated soil particles is of importance for exposures to agricultural workers who reenter fields after pesticide application. With respect to dermal exposure to pesticide-contaminated particulate matter, several occurrences of human toxicity to ethyl parathion in citrus groves have been reported. These exposures resulted from dermal contact with high concentrations of the toxic transformation product paraoxon in soil dust contaminated as a result of application of pesticide to the overhead foliage of trees. To assess dermal exposure to chemically-contaminated soil at sites of concern, dermal adherence of soil must be determined prior to the assessment of dermal absorption. The purpose of the experiment reported herein was to determine the amount of soil (mg/cm{sup 2}) that adheres to adult hands under various soil conditions. These conditions include the type of soil, the organic content of the soil, and the particle size of the soil.

Methods for comparing Salmonella mutagenicity data sets using nonlinear models

A variety of linear and nonlinear mathematical models have been proposed to characterize Salmonella mutagenicity data sets, but no systematic procedure has been suggested for comparing two or more data sets across experiments, laboratories, occasions, mutagens or treatment conditions. In this paper, a general method for data-set comparison is provided. Nonlinear regression techniques are applied to real data sets. Data-set and parameter equivalence are described in depth. Confidence-band construction for nonlinear models and other graphical techniques are presented as auxiliary tools. Key Statistical Analysis System (SAS) code programs are provided.

Comparative evaluation of absorbed dose estimates derived from passive dosimetry measurements to those derived from biological monitoring: validation of exposure monitoring methodologies.

Passive dosimetry (PD) methods for measuring and estimating exposure to agricultural workers (i.e., persons handling agricultural chemicals and working in treated crops) have been in use since the 1950s. A large number of studies were conducted in the 1950s through 1970s to characterize exposure. Since the 1980s quantitative dermal PD methods are used in conjunction with inhalation PD methods to measure whole-body exposure. These exposure or absorbed dose estimates are then compared to “no effect” exposure levels for hazards identified in toxicology studies, and have become the standard for risk assessment for regulatory agencies. The PD methods used have never been validated. Validation in the context of human exposure monitoring methods means that a method has been shown to measure accurately a delivered dose in humans. The most practical alternative to isolating parts of the body for validating recovery methods is to utilize field exposure studies in which concurrent or consecutive measurements of exposure and absorbed dose have been made with PD and biomonitoring in the same cohorts of individuals. This ensures that a direct comparison can be made between the two estimates of absorbed dose, one derived from PD and the other from biomonitoring. There are several studies available (published and proprietary) employing both of these approaches. Reports involving 14 concurrent or consecutive PD-biomonitoring studies were quantitatively evaluated with 18 different methods of application or reentry scenarios for eight different active ingredients for which measured human kinetics and dermal absorption data existed. This evaluation demonstrated that the total absorbed dose estimated using PD for important handler and reentry scenarios is generally similar to the measurements for those same scenarios made using human urinary biomonitoring methods. The statistical analysis of individual worker PD:biomonitoring ratios showed them to be significantly correlated in these studies. The PD techniques currently employed yield a reproducible, standard methodology that is valid and reliably quantifies exposure.

Estimation of the percutaneous absorption of permethrin in humans using the parallelogram method.

The objective of this study was to develop an estimate of the percent dermal absorption of permethrin in humans to provide more accurate estimates of potential systemically absorbed dose associated with dermal exposure scenarios. Piperonyl butoxide (PBO) was used as a reference compound. The human percutaneous absorption estimate was based on the assumption that the ratio of in vivo dermal absorption (expressed as a percentage during a given time period) of permethrin through rat skin to in vitro dermal absorption through rat skin was the same as the ratio of in vivo dermal absorption in humans to in vitro dermal absorption with human skin, known as the parallelogram method. The ratio of dermal absorption by in vitro rat skin to absorption by in vitro human skin ranged from 6.7 to 15.4 (for a 24-h exposure period) with an average of 11. Data suggest in vivo human dermal absorption values for permethrin ranging from 1.4 to 3.3% when estimated based on 24-h in vivo rat values, and 2.5 to 5.7% based on 5-d in vivo rat values. The parallelogram method used to estimate dermal absorption of permethrin and PBO is supported by results from several other compounds for which in vivo and in vitro rat and human dermal absorption data exist. Collectively, these data indicate that estimating human dermal absorption from in vitro human and rat plus in vivo rat data are typically accurate within ±3-fold of the values measured in human subjects.

Human exposure assessment. I: Understanding the uncertainties.

Exposure estimates produced using predictive exposure assessment methods are associated with a number of uncertainties that relate to the inherent variability of the values for a given input parameter (e.g., body weight, ingestion rate, inhalation rate) and to unknowns concerning the representativeness of the assumptions and methods used. Despite recent or ongoing consensus-building efforts that have made significant strides forward in promoting consistency in methodologies and parameter default values, the potential variability in the output exposure estimates has not been adequately addressed from a quantitative aspect. This is exemplified by remaining tendencies within federal and state agencies to use worst-case approaches for exposure assessment. In this study, range-sensitivity and Monte Carlo analyses were performed on several different exposure scenarios in order to illustrate the impact of the variability in input parameters on the total variability of the exposure output. The results of this study indicate that the variability associated with the example scenarios range up to more than four orders of magnitude when just some of the parameters are allowed to vary. Comparison of exposure estimates obtained using Monte Carlo simulations (in which selected parameters were allowed to vary over their observed ranges) to exposure estimates obtained using standard parameter default assumptions demonstrate that a default value approach can produce an exposure estimate that exceeds the 95th percentile exposure in an exposed population.

Human exposure assessment. II. Quantifying and reducing the uncertainties

Alternative methods of human exposure assessment that reduce and/or allow quantification of the uncertainties associated with exposure estimates are surveyed and illustrated. These alternative approaches include (1) use of more appropriate exposure parameter default values rather than values that result in extreme exposure estimates; (2) incorporation of time-activity data to better define appropriate exposure duration values; (3) the use of reasonable exposure scenarios rather than the traditional Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI) approach; (4) the use of stochastic approaches such as Monte Carlo-based and information analysis-based methods; (5) use of bivariate analysis to identify the extent to which interdependencies between different exposure parameters affect the distribution of exposure estimates; (6) use of less-than-lifetime exposure and risk assessment; and (7) incorporation of physiological considerations relevant to absorbed dose estimation, including route-specific impacts, use of improved absorption factors, and application of pharmacokinetic models. Other ways to improve the exposure assessment process, including assuring statistical equivalency in comparing different exposure estimates and incorporation of sensitive subpopulation considerations are also discussed, as are key research needs.

Experimental Methods for Determining Permethrin Dermal Absorption

The objectives of this study were to (1) determine the percutaneous absorption of radiolabeled permethrin and piperonyl butoxide (PBO) in vivo in rats and in vitro to permit a calculation of the ratio of in vitro to in vivo values, and (2) test a method of estimating in vivo human absorption. Carbon-14 labeled permethrin in ethanol solution was applied to the clipped skin of rats in vivo at doses of 2.25, 20, or 200 μg/cm2. As a reference compound, 14C-labeled PBO in isopropanol solution was applied to rat skin in vivo at a dose of 100 μg/cm2. All applications were washed at 24 h postapplication, and rats were sacrificed either at 24 h for permethrin or 5 d for both compounds. The radiolabel recovered from carcass, urine including cage wash, and feces was summed to determine percent absorption. For the 24-h time point, at doses of 2.25, 20, and 200 μg/cm2 of permethrin, values of 22, 22, and 28%, respectively, were obtained for in vivo rat percutaneous absorption (n = 6 per dose). For the 5-d time point, at doses of 2.25, 20, and 200 μg/cm2 of permethrin, values of 38, 38, and 30%, respectively, were obtained for in vivo rat percutaneous absorption (n = 6 per dose). The 5-d percutaneous absorption of 14C-PBO at 100 μg/cm2 was determined to be 42 % (n = 6). Dose and test duration did not exert a statistically significant effect on percutaneous absorption of permethrin in the rat in vivo. For in vitro absorption determination, 14C-permethrin in ethanol solution was applied to freshly excised human skin in an in vitro test system predictive of skin absorption in humans. Twenty-four hours after application, the radiolabel recovered from dermis and receptor fluid was summed to determine percent absorption. At doses of approximately 2.25, 20, and 200 μg/cm2 permethrin, values of 1, 3, and 2%, respectively, were obtained for percutaneous absorption (n = 9 per dose). Excised human skin absorption of 14C-PBO at 100 μg/cm2 was determined to be 7% (n = 9). Excised rat skin absorptions of permethrin at 2.25, 20, and 200 μg/cm2 were found to be 20, 18, and 24%, respectively (n = 6 per dose), approximately 10-fold higher than human skin absorption. Excised rat skin absorption of PBO was also higher (35%) than the value obtained for human skin by a factor of about 5.

Comparison of four probabilistic models (CARES ® , Calendex™, ConsExpo, and SHEDS) to estimate aggregate residential exposures to pesticides

Two deterministic models (US EPAs Office of Pesticide Programs Residential Standard Operating Procedures (OPP Residential SOPs) and Draft Protocol for Measuring Childrens Non-Occupational Exposure to Pesticides by all Relevant Pathways (Draft Protocol)) and four probabilistic models (CARES®, Calendex™, ConsExpo, and SHEDS) were used to estimate aggregate residential exposures to pesticides. The route-specific exposure estimates for young children (2–5 years) generated by each model were compared to evaluate data inputs, algorithms, and underlying assumptions. Three indoor exposure scenarios were considered: crack and crevice, fogger, and flying insect killer. Dermal exposure estimates from the OPP Residential SOPs and the Draft Protocol were 4.75 and 2.37 mg/kg/day (crack and crevice scenario) and 0.73 and 0.36 mg/kg/day (fogger), respectively. The dermal exposure estimates (99th percentile) for the crack and crevice scenario were 16.52, 12.82, 3.57, and 3.30 mg/kg/day for CARES, Calendex, SHEDS, and ConsExpo, respectively. Dermal exposure estimates for the fogger scenario from CARES and Calendex (1.50 and 1.47 mg/kg/day, respectively) were slightly higher than those from SHEDS and ConsExpo (0.74 and 0.55 mg/kg/day, respectively). The ConsExpo derived non-dietary ingestion estimates (99th percentile) under these two scenarios were higher than those from SHEDS, CARES, and Calendex. All models produced extremely low exposure estimates for the flying insect killer scenario. Using similar data inputs, the model estimates by route for these scenarios were consistent and comparable. Most of the models predicted exposures within a factor of 5 at the 50th and 99th percentiles. The differences identified are explained by activity assumptions, input distributions, and exposure algorithms.

Evaluation of Predictive Algorithms Used for Estimating Potential Postapplication, Nondietary Ingestion Exposures to Pesticides Associated with Children's Hand-to-Mouth Behavior

Postapplication exposure assessment related to indoor residential application of pesticide products requires consideration of product use information, application methods, chemical-specific deposition, time-dependent availability and transferability of surface residues, reentry time, and temporal location and macro- and microactivity/behavior patterns (Baker et al., 2000). Childrens mouthing behavior results in potential postapplication exposure to available pesticides in treated microenvironments through the nondietary ingestion route, in addition to the dermal or inhalation routes. Childrens activities and associated behaviors may result in multiple or repeat contact of dermal areas (clothed and unclothed body areas and hands) with treated surfaces, or surfaces that may have indirect sources of residues. Further, some surfaces contacted may have transferable pesticide residues and others may not. Transfer of residues from the indoor residential environment to the dermal surface (e.g., hands) of an individual has been assumed to be linear as a function of time and number of contacts. However, studies suggest that this transfer process to the hands and other body areas may be rapidly saturable. In the most recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) “Residential Exposure Assessment Standard Operating Procedures” (U.S. EPA, 2012), the input variable for the number of dermal contacts (with treated surfaces) is an exponent, making the relationship nonlinear. Further, removal processes such as hand washing and transfer to untreated surfaces are important to consider. Predictive algorithms for estimating childrens hand-to-mouth-related incidental ingestion exposures post pesticide application have been developed by the EPA/OPP and incorporated into probabilistic models. A review of literature addressing variables used to estimate potential incidental ingestion exposure is presented. Data relevant to input variables for predictive algorithms are discussed, including the results of a multiyear, pesticide transferable residue measurement program conducted by the Non-Dietary Exposure Task Force (NDETF) and the associated distributional characterization for this key variable. Sources of conservative bias in current hand-to-mouth, incidental ingestion exposure estimation and the role of biomonitoring to evaluate predicted exposures are discussed.

Cyphenothrin Flea and Tick Squeeze-On for Dogs: Evaluation of Potential Health Risks Based on the Results of Observational Biological Monitoring

An observational biomonitoring study was conducted involving adults and children in households that purchased and applied a cyphenothrin-containing spot-on product for dogs as part of their normal pet care practices. The 3- to 6-yr-old children had greater exposure than the adult applicators in the same house, 3.8 and 0.6 μg/kg body weight, respectively. The mean measured values in children were 13-fold lower than those estimated using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) current standard operating procedures (SOP) for pet products (assuming 5% dermal absorption), although the maximum absorbed dosage of one child on one day was equivalent to the default value derived from the SOPs. With regard to potential human health risks, it can be concluded that despite the inherent conservatism in both the exposure and toxicology data, the margins of exposure (MOE) were consistently greater than 100 for average, 95th percentile, and maximum exposures. More specifically, the results of this study demonstrated that the MOE were consistently greater than 1,000 for mean exposures and exceeded 100 for 95th percentile and maximum measured exposures, which clearly indicates a reasonable certainty of no harm when using the cyphenothrin spot-on products. It is also noteworthy that Sergeant’s spot-on products containing cyphenothrin currently sold in the United States have lower weight percentages of active ingredient and lower applied amounts than those used by all but two of the participant households in this study.