Literature DB >> 10859783

Percentiles of the product of uncertainty factors for establishing probabilistic reference doses.

D W Gaylor1, R L Kodell.   

Abstract

Exposure guidelines for potentially toxic substances are often based on a reference dose (RfD) that is determined by dividing a no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL), lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL), or benchmark dose (BD) corresponding to a low level of risk, by a product of uncertainty factors. The uncertainty factors for animal to human extrapolation, variable sensitivities among humans, extrapolation from measured subchronic effects to unknown results for chronic exposures, and extrapolation from a LOAEL to a NOAEL can be thought of as random variables that vary from chemical to chemical. Selected databases are examined that provide distributions across chemicals of inter- and intraspecies effects, ratios of LOAELs to NOAELs, and differences in acute and chronic effects, to illustrate the determination of percentiles for uncertainty factors. The distributions of uncertainty factors tend to be approximately lognormally distributed. The logarithm of the product of independent uncertainty factors is approximately distributed as the sum of normally distributed variables, making it possible to estimate percentiles for the product. Hence, the size of the products of uncertainty factors can be selected to provide adequate safety for a large percentage (e.g., approximately 95%) of RfDs. For the databases used to describe the distributions of uncertainty factors, using values of 10 appear to be reasonable and conservative. For the databases examined the following simple "Rule of 3s" is suggested that exceeds the estimated 95th percentile of the product of uncertainty factors: If only a single uncertainty factor is required use 33, for any two uncertainty factors use 3 x 33 approximately 100, for any three uncertainty factors use a combined factor of 3 x 100 = 300, and if all four uncertainty factors are needed use a total factor of 3 x 300 = 900. If near the 99th percentile is desired use another factor of 3. An additional factor may be needed for inadequate data or a modifying factor for other uncertainties (e.g., different routes of exposure) not covered above.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10859783     DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.202023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  5 in total

1.  Simultaneous Confidence Bands for Abbott-Adjusted Quantal Response Models.

Authors:  Brooke E Buckley; Walter W Piegorsch
Journal:  Stat Methodol       Date:  2008-05

2.  Assessment of potential risk levels associated with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reference values.

Authors:  Rosemary Castorina; Tracey J Woodruff
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 3.  A Unified Probabilistic Framework for Dose-Response Assessment of Human Health Effects.

Authors:  Weihsueh A Chiu; Wout Slob
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2015-05-22       Impact factor: 9.031

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

Authors:  D A Dankovic; B D Naumann; A Maier; M L Dourson; L S Levy
Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.155

Review 5.  Dispelling urban myths about default uncertainty factors in chemical risk assessment--sufficient protection against mixture effects?

Authors:  Olwenn V Martin; Scholze Martin; Andreas Kortenkamp
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2013-07-01       Impact factor: 5.984

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.