| Literature DB >> 20467865 |
Gunnar Damgård Nielsen1, Peder Wolkoff.
Abstract
Formaldehyde is a ubiquitous indoor air pollutant that is classified as "Carcinogenic to humans (Group 1)" (IARC, Formaldehyde, 2-butoxyethanol and 1-tert-butoxypropanol-2-ol. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, vol 88. World Health Organization, Lyon, pp 39-325, 2006). For nasal cancer in rats, the exposure-response relationship is highly non-linear, supporting a no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) that allows setting a guideline value. Epidemiological studies reported no increased incidence of nasopharyngeal cancer in humans below a mean level of 1 ppm and peak levels below 4 ppm, consistent with results from rat studies. Rat studies indicate that cytotoxicity-induced cell proliferation (NOAEL at 1 ppm) is a key mechanism in development of nasal cancer. However, the linear unit risk approach that is based on conservative ("worst-case") considerations is also used for risk characterization of formaldehyde exposures. Lymphohematopoietic malignancies are not observed consistently in animal studies and if caused by formaldehyde in humans, they are high-dose phenomenons with non-linear exposure-response relationships. Apparently, these diseases are not reported in epidemiological studies at peak exposures below 2 ppm and average exposures below 0.5 ppm. At the similar airborne exposure levels in rodents, the nasal cancer effect is much more prominent than lymphohematopoietic malignancies. Thus, prevention of nasal cancer is considered to prevent lymphohematopoietic malignancies. Departing from the rat studies, the guideline value of the WHO (Air quality guidelines for Europe, 2nd edn. World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, pp 87-91, 2000), 0.08 ppm (0.1 mg m(-3)) formaldehyde, is considered preventive of carcinogenic effects in compliance with epidemiological findings.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20467865 PMCID: PMC2874486 DOI: 10.1007/s00204-010-0549-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Toxicol ISSN: 0340-5761 Impact factor: 5.153
Nasal epithelial squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) in male (M) and female (F) rats at long-term inhalation exposures to formaldehyde
| Concentration rangea (ppm) | 1b | 2c | 3d | 4e | 5f | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M (%) | F (%) | M (%) | M (%) | M (%) | M (%) | |
| 0 | 0/118 (0) | 0/114 (0) | 0/99 (0) | 0/90 (0) | 0/26 (0) | 0/32 (0) |
| 0.1 | – | – | – | – | 1/26 (3.8) | – |
| 0.3 | – | – | – | – | – | 0/32 (0) |
| 0.7 | – | – | – | 0/90 (0) | – | – |
| 1 | – | – | – | – | 1/28 (3.6) | – |
| 2 | 0/118 (0) | 0/118 (0) | – | 0/96 (0) | – | 0/32 (0) |
| 6 | 1/119 (0.8) | 1/116 (0.9) | – | 1/90 (1.1) | – | – |
| 10 | – | – | – | 20/90 (22) | 1/26 (3.8) | – |
| 14 | 51/117 (44) | 52/115 (45) | – | – | – | – |
| 15 | – | – | 38/99 (38) | 69/147 (47) | – | 13/32 (41) |
aFor exact concentrations, see the other footnotes
bExposures were to 0, 2.0, 5.6 or 14.3 ppm, 6 h day−1, 5 days week−1 for 24 months in Fischer 344 rats which was followed by 6 months of non-exposure (Kerns et al. 1983). The numerator is the number of animals with SCC and the denominator is the number of nasal cavities evaluated. The percentage is given in parenthesis
cExposures were to 0 or 14.8 ppm lifetime, 6 h day−1, 5 days week−1 in Sprague–Dawley rats (Sellakumar et al. 1985)
dExposures were to 0, 0.69, 2.05, 6.01, 9.93 or 14.96 ppm, 6 h day−1, 5 days week−1 for 24 months in Fischer 344 rats (Monticello et al. 1996)
eExposures were to 0, 0.1, 1 or 9.8 ppm, 6 h day−1, 5 days week−1 for 28 months in Wistar rats (Woutersen et al. 1989). This study did not show an exposure-dependent development of SCC, for further discussion, see the text
fFisher 344 rats were exposed 6 h day−1, 5 days week−1 for 28 months to 0, 0.30, 2.17 or 14.85 ppm (Kamata et al. 1997)
Cytogenetic effects in peripheral blood lymphocytes in formaldehyde (FA) exposed individuals
| Exposure | Number of participants; exposed (E), controls (C) and smokers (S) | Exposure in years, mean (range) or as indicated. | Exposure in ppm. | Statistically significant outcome of FA exposures |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pathology and anatomy laboratorya | E: 30 (S: 8) C: 30 (S: 7) (matched) | 11 (0.5–27) | M: 0.44 (0.04–1.58) P: up to 4.43 | Increased MN, SCE and DNA damage (comet assay) |
| Pathology and anatomy laboratoryb | E: 59 (S: 12) C: 37 (S: 9) (matched) | 13.2 (0.5–34) | M (8 h): 0.1 (<0.1–0.7) P: 2 (0.1–20) | Increased MN from pre to post-shift due to chromosome loss. No DNA damage detected |
| Pathology and anatomy laboratoryc | E: 90 (S: 31) C: 52 (S: ~24) | 15.4 (1–39) | M: 0.4 (0.04–0.7) P: 2.2 (0.7–5.6) | Increase in SCE, but not exposure-level dependent |
| Pathology and anatomy laboratoryd | E: 6 (S:?) C: 5 (S:?) | (4–11), 2–4 h day−1, 2–3 days week−1 | M: (0.9–6.4) P: (8.0–8.9) | No increase in chromosome aberration and no increase in SCE |
| Students taking anatomy laboratory coursee | E: 23 non-smokers | 3 h three times per week for 8 weeks | M: 0.41 ± 0.24(SD) P: 1.04 | No increase in SCE and no change in lymphocyte proliferation comparing pre and post exposures |
| Students taking anatomy laboratory coursef | E: 13 (S: 0) C: 10–13 (S: 0) | 10 h week−1 for 12 weeks | M: 2.4 | Increase in MN, SCE and frequency of chromosome aberrations |
| Students taking anatomy laboratory courseg | E: 30 C: 30 (matched) | 7 h week−1 for 15 months | M: <1 | No increase in chromosomal aberrations |
| Students taking anatomy laboratory courseh | E: 8 (S: 0) | >2 Afternoons/week for 10 weeks | M: 1.2 ± 0.8 during dissection | Before versus after class evaluation: Increase in SCE |
| Mortician students taking embalming coursei | C: 23 (S:6) | 9 weeks | M: 1.5 during embalming P: 4–14 | Before versus after course evaluation: Decreased O6-alkylguanine DNA alkyltransferase activity, but not exposure-dependent |
| Mortician students taking embalming coursej | E: 29 (S: 5) | 85-day study period | M (8 h): 0.33. During embalming (2 h): M: 1.4 (0.15–4.3) P: 6.6 | Before versus after course evaluation: MN increased, whereas SCE decreased |
| Factory with FA exposure. | E: 18 (S: 0) | 8.5 (1–15) | M (8 h): 0.8 ± 0.23(SD) P: 1.4 | Increase in SCE |
| Waitressesk | E: 12 (S: 0) | 12 weeks | M (8 h): 0.09 ± 0.05 P: 0.24 | No increase in SCE |
| C: 23 students (S: 0) | M (8 h): 0.008 ± 0.002 P: 0.012 | |||
Carpet plant Plastic ware plantl | E: 79 (S: 39) E: 97 (S: 36) C: 90 (S: 27) | (0.2–21) (0.2–25) | M: (~0.24–1.0) M: (~0.4–0.73) | Both plants showed increased chromosomal aberrations, but independent of the exposure length |
| Paper factorym | E: 20 (S: 6) C: 20 (S: 13) | 14.5 (2–30) | Outside the papermachine ~ 0.2 P: ≤3 Where FA was 20–50, masks and protective clothes were worn. | Increased incidence of dicentrics or dicentrics and ring chromosomes. No increase in SCE. |
| FA manufacturing and processingn | E: 15 C: 15 (matched: age and sex) (S: ?) | 28 (23–35) | After 1971) ≤ 1 Before 1971 ≤ 5 | Numerically the frequency of aberrant metaphases was lowest in exposed workers |
aCosta et al. (2008)
bOrsière et al. (2006)
cShaham et al. (2002)
dThomson et al. (1984)
eYing et al. (1999)
fHe et al. (1998). No details on exposure characterization
gVasudeva and Anand (1996). No detail on exposure characterization
hYager et al. (1986)
iHayes et al. (1997)
jSuruda et al. (1993)
kYe et al. (2005)
lLazutka et al. (1999). Approximate area concentrations were from the hygienic control services. Additional exposures were to styrene and phenol, which were ~0.13–1.4 and 0.3 mg m−3, respectively, in the carpet plant and ~4.4–6.2 and 0.5–0.75 mg m−3, respectively, in the plastic ware plant
mBauchinger and Schmid (1985)
nFleig et al. (1982)
Cancer risks from formaldehyde exposures were reviewed on the basis of the three largest and recently updated cohorts
| Study | NCI cohorta (<1996–1994) | NCI cohorta (<1996–2004) | UK cohort (1941–2000)a | US garment worker cohort (1955–1998)a | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exposure (ppm) | Median average intensity: 0.45 and range: 0.01–4.25. Exposure to ≥2 occurred in 4.7% and 22.6% had peak exposures at ≥4 | Range: 0.1 to >2 | Geometric mean: 0.15 and geometric standard deviation 1.90. Range 0.09–0.2. Past exposures may have been substantially higher | |||||||||
| Risk estimateb | ICD-8c | O/E | SMR | ICD-8c | O/E | SMR | ICD-9c | O/E | SMR | ICD-9c | O/E | SMR |
| All cancers | 140–209 | 1916d/–e |
| – | – |
| 140–208 | 1511/1375.2 |
| 140–208 | 608/– |
|
| Nose and nasal sinuses | 160 | 3/– | 1.19 | – | – | – | 160 | 2/2.3 | 0.87 | 160 | 0/0.16 | – |
| Pharynx | – | – | – | 146–149.1 | 15/9.7 | 1.55 | 146–149 | 3/– | 0.64 | |||
| Nasopharynx | 147 | 8f/– |
| 147 | 1/2 | – | 147 | 0/0.96 | – | |||
| Larynx | 161 | 23/– | 0.95 | – | – | – | 161 | 14/13.1 | 1.07 | 161 | 3/– | 0.88 |
| Lung | 162 | 641/– | 0.97 | – | – | – | 162 | 594/486.8 |
| 162 | 147/– | 0.98 |
| Bone | 170 | 7/– | 1.57 | – | – | – | 170 | 6/3.5 | 1.73 | – | ||
| Prostate | 185 | 131/– | 0.90 | – | – | – | 185 | 80/99.4 | 0.80 | 185 | 11/– | 1.58 |
| Hodgkin’s disease | 201 | 20/– | 1.26 | 201 | 25/– | 1.42 | 201 | 6/8.5 | 0.70 | 201 | 2/– | 0.55 |
| Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma | 200 | 44/– |
| 200 | 94/– | 0.85 | 200 | 31/31.7 | 0.98 | 200 | 5/– | 0.85 |
| &202 | &202 | &202.0 | ||||||||||
| &202.1 | ||||||||||||
| &202.8 | ||||||||||||
| Multiple myelomas | 203 | 28/– | 0.88 | 203 | 48/– | 0.94 | 203.0 | 15/17.5 | 0.86 | – | ||
| Leukemia | 204–207 | 65/– | 0.85 | 204–207 | 116/– | 1.02 | 204–208 | 31/34.1 | 0.91 | 204–208 | 24/– | 1.09 |
| Lymphatic leukemia | – | – | – | 204 | 36/– | 1.15 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Myeloid leukemia | 205 | –/– | – | 205 | 44/– | 0.90 | 0.89g | 205 | 15/– | 1.44 | ||
| Stomach | – | – | – | – | – | – | 151 | 150/114.4 |
| 151 | 13/– | 0.80 |
| All digestive | 150–159 | 420/– |
| – | – | – | – | – | – | 150–159 | 116/– |
|
The US National Cancer Institute (NCI) cohort comprised 25,619 workers employed in ten US formaldehyde producing or using facilities. Workers were employed prior to 1 January 1966 and were followed-up through 31 December 1994 (Hauptmann et al. 2003; Hauptmann et al. 2004) and recently through 31 December 2004 for lymphohematopoietic malignancies (Freeman et al. 2009). A British (UK) cohort from six British factories, comprising 14,014 men employed after 1937 and followed-up through December 2000 (Coggon et al. 2003). The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health established a cohort with 11,039 employees in three garment facilities (US garment worker cohort). The study was updated through 31 December 1998 (Pinkerton et al. 2004)
aComparison with national death rates
bStandardized mortality ratio (SMR), observed cases (O), expected cases (E), and the ratio (O/E). When the 95% CI does not include 1.00, it is indicated by * and bold
cInternational Classification of Diseases: 8th revision (ICD-8) and 9th revision (ICD-9)
dIn the Hauptmann et al. (2003) study, the number of formaldehyde workers who had died was 1,916 (2-year lag interval) and in the Hauptmann et al. (2004), the number was 1,723 (15-year lag interval). The lag interval was 2 years in the Freeman et al. (2009) study
eNot indicated
fHauptmann et al. 2004 (Table 2) report eight nasopharyngeal cancers among formaldehyde exposed workers that were used for the SMR calculation. Although one subject was misclassified on the death certificate, this subject was retained in the SMR calculation since population reference rates are based on death certificates. Also, the exact 95% CI was reported to be 0.91–4.14 and thus the SMR value of 2.10 is not statistically significant. The seven cases in the text and in Tables 3–6 of Hauptmann et al. (2004) were used for calculation of relative risks
gEstimated by Cole and Axten (2004) for the high exposed group (>2 ppm)
Summary of approaches used in the risk assessment strategies for formaldehyde (FA)
| Effect | Supporting a NOAEL approach | Supporting a linear extrapolation |
|---|---|---|
| Repair of DNA–protein crosslinks | No accumulation of DPX based on rapid in vivo repair in rats | Accumulation of DPX based on in vitro immortalized cell linesa |
| DPX formation in lymphocyte cultures | DPX formation was non-linear and the DPX level in non-exposed cells was similar to DPX in cells at low FA levels | – |
| Genotoxic effects in nasal and buccal mucosa cells | Chromosomal aberrations and MN are considered to be sensitive genetic endpoints. Both are suggested to show NOAEL at indoor air levels | A NOAEL is not accepted for FA induced genotoxic effects |
| Genotoxic effects in peripheral lymphocytes | In vitro cytogenetic tests suggested NOAEL | NOAEL is not accepted for FA induced genotoxic effects |
| Development of nasal tumors | In rats, the exposure–effect relationship was non-linear with an apparent NOAEL | A linear exposure–response relationship at low exposures cannot be disproved statistically |
| Development of nasal tumors | In rats, cell proliferation was considered crucial for development of tumors | Assuming that tumor development may occur without cytotoxicity induced increase in cell proliferation |
| Development of nasal tumors | In rats, a minimum FA exposure level was necessary even in the case of cell proliferation | Assuming that all FA exposure levels increase the risk of development of tumors |
| Nasopharyngeal cancer in humans | The FA-induced effects seem to occur at high exposure levels, especially high peak levels. An apparent level exists where no increased risk was observed | Due to a limited number of cases, a low-level exposure risk cannot be disproved |
| Lymphohematopoietic malignancies in humans | Although limited consistency exists across studies, potential effects seem to occur at high exposure levels, especially high peak levels. An apparent level exists where no increased risk was observed | Due to a limited number of cases, a low-level exposure risk cannot be disproved |
For explanations see text
aSubramaniam et al. (2007)