Literature DB >> 20156007

Setting occupational exposure limits for unstudied pharmaceutical intermediates using an in vitro parallelogram approach.

Mark S V Maier1.   

Abstract

Occupational exposure limits for unstudied pharmaceutical synthetic intermediates are often established under the assumption that penultimate and near-ultimate intermediates have the same structure-activity and dose-response as the ultimate active pharmaceutical ingredient (API). This is seldom the case because moieties that render biological activity to the API are often protected or modified for synthetic purposes. Incorrectly assuming that intermediates have biological activity similar to the API may lead to excessive exposure controls that in turn impose unnecessary ergonomic hazards on workers and greatly reduces the scale and efficiency of production. Instead of assuming intermediates have the same toxicity profile as the API, it is feasible to use a parallelogram approach to establish exposure limits for synthetic intermediates using low-cost in vitro data. By comparing in vitro responses of intermediates to structurally similar data-rich molecules such as the API, occupational exposure categories can be established for unstudied intermediates. In this contribution (1) methods for setting occupational exposure limits for data-poor compounds are reviewed; (2) applications and limitations of in vitro assays are discussed; (3) two exposure categorization examples are presented that rely on an in vitro parallelogram approach; and (4) inherent safeguards for uncertainties in pharmaceutical risk assessment are identified. In vitro hazard and dose-response information for unstudied intermediates that are structurally similar to well-studied APIs can greatly enhance the basis for setting occupational exposure limits for unstudied synthetic intermediates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20156007     DOI: 10.3109/15376511003638280

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Mech Methods        ISSN: 1537-6516            Impact factor:   2.987


  4 in total

Review 1.  Photodynamic therapy: occupational hazards and preventative recommendations for clinical administration by healthcare providers.

Authors:  John D Breskey; Steven E Lacey; Benjamin J Vesper; William A Paradise; James A Radosevich; Michael D Colvard
Journal:  Photomed Laser Surg       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 2.796

2.  A quantitative framework to group nanoscale and microscale particles by hazard potency to derive occupational exposure limits: Proof of concept evaluation.

Authors:  Nathan M Drew; Eileen D Kuempel; Ying Pei; Feng Yang
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2017-08-05       Impact factor: 3.271

Review 3.  Characterizing risk assessments for the development of occupational exposure limits for engineered nanomaterials.

Authors:  P A Schulte; E D Kuempel; N M Drew
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 3.271

4.  A multi-stakeholder perspective on the use of alternative test strategies for nanomaterial safety assessment.

Authors:  Andre E Nel; Elina Nasser; Hilary Godwin; David Avery; Tina Bahadori; Lynn Bergeson; Elizabeth Beryt; James C Bonner; Darrell Boverhof; Janet Carter; Vince Castranova; J R Deshazo; Saber M Hussain; Agnes B Kane; Frederick Klaessig; Eileen Kuempel; Mark Lafranconi; Robert Landsiedel; Timothy Malloy; Mary Beth Miller; Jeffery Morris; Kenneth Moss; Gunter Oberdorster; Kent Pinkerton; Richard C Pleus; Jo Anne Shatkin; Russell Thomas; Thabet Tolaymat; Amy Wang; Jeffrey Wong
Journal:  ACS Nano       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 15.881

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.