| Literature DB >> 24531164 |
Kathryn Z Guyton1, Karen A Hogan, Cheryl Siegel Scott, Glinda S Cooper, Ambuja S Bale, Leonid Kopylev, Stanley Barone, Susan L Makris, Barbara Glenn, Ravi P Subramaniam, Maureen R Gwinn, Rebecca C Dzubow, Weihsueh A Chiu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completed a toxicological review of tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene, PCE) in February 2012 in support of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24531164 PMCID: PMC3984230 DOI: 10.1289/ehp.1307359
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Health Perspect ISSN: 0091-6765 Impact factor: 9.031
Figure 1Simplified PCE metabolism scheme. PCE is metabolized in humans and experimental animal species by both oxidation (left) and GSH conjugation (right) metabolic pathways, yielding numerous toxicologically active compounds (Lash and Parker 2001). Tetrachlorethylene metabolism yields the oxidative metabolites TCAC, which hydrolyses to yield TCA, and the epoxide PCE-O, which decomposes in turn to EDD, CO, and CO2. OXA is also a product of PCE oxidation. GSH conjugation products include TCVG, the cysteine conjugate TCVC, and the mercapturate NAcTCVC and its sulfoxidation products. DCA is likely produced via β-lyase–mediated bioactivation, although TCA dechlorination may be an additional minor source. *Metabolites identified in blood, urine, or breath after in vivo PCE exposure (rodent or human).
Results of epidemiological studies of PCE and bladder cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, or multiple myeloma using higher quality exposure assessment methodology.
| Study type/reference, population, design | Exposure surrogate | Bladder cancer RR (95% CI) [ | non-Hodgkin lymphoma RR (95% CI) [ | Multiple myeloma RR (95% CI) [ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cohort studies | ||||
| Antilla et al. 1995 (Finland): biologically monitored workers (SIR), blood PCE | Any PCE | Not reported | 3.76 (0.77, 11.0) [3] | (Expected = 0.38) [0] |
| Boice et al. 1999 (United States): aerospace workers (SMR, RR), job-exposure matrix | Any routine exposure to PCE | 0.70 (0.09, 2.53) [2] | 1.70 (0.73, 3.34) [8] | 0.40 (0.01, 2.25) [1] |
| Duration, among those with routine or intermittent exposure to PCE: | ||||
| No routine or intermittent exposure | Not reported | 1.0 (Referent) [32] | 1.0 (Referent) [24] | |
| < 1 year | 1.25 (0.43, 3.57) [4] | 0.46 (0.06, 3.48) [1] | ||
| 1–4 years | 1.11 (0.46, 2.70) [6] | 1.13 (0.38, 3.35) [4] | ||
| ≥ 5 years | 1.41 (0.67, 3.00) [10] | 0.24 (0.03, 1.84) [1] | ||
| Blair et al. 2003 (United States): laundry and dry-cleaning workers (SMR), union records | Little to no PCE exposure | 1.4 (0.4, 3.2) [5] | Not reported | Not reported |
| Medium-to-high PCE exposure | 1.5 (0.6, 3.1) [7] | |||
| Lynge et al. 2006 (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway): nested case–control, census occupation codes and pension data/questionnaires | Dry-cleaner job title | 1.44 (1.07, 1.93) [93] | Not studied | Not studied |
| Employment duration (dry cleaner): | Not studied | Not studied | ||
| Never | 1.0 (Referent) [188] | |||
| < 1 year | 1.50 (0.57, 3.96) [6] | |||
| 2–4 years | 2.39 (1.09, 5.22) [10] | |||
| 5–9 years | 0.91 (0.52, 1.59) [17] | |||
| > 10 years | 1.57 (1.07, 2.29) [54] | |||
| Unknown duration | 1.97 (0.64, 6.05) [6] | |||
| Radican et al. 2008 (United States): aircraft maintenance workers (RR, internal referent), job-exposure matrix | Any PCE: | |||
| Males | Not reported | 2.32 (0.75, 7.15) [5] | 1.71 (0.42, 6.91) [3] | |
| Females | Not reported | 2.35 (0.52, 10.7) [2] | 7.84 (1.43, 43.1) [2] | |
| Seldén and Ahlborg 2011 (Sweden): dry-cleaning workers (SIR), census occupation codes, questionnaire, and company-provided data pertaining to solvent use | Any PCE: | |||
| Males | Not reported | 2.02 (1.13, 3.34) [15] | Not reported | |
| Females | Not reported | 1.14 (0.68, 1.81) [18] | Not reported | |
| Calvert et al. 2011 (United States): laundry and dry-cleaning workers (SMR), union employment records (PCE-only exposure based on history of solvent use by shops) | Any PCE | Not reported [0] | 2.46 (0.90, 5.36) [6] | Not reported |
| Case–control studies | ||||
| Aschengrau et al. 1993 [United States (Massachusetts)]: residential history, ordinal estimate of PCE-contaminated water from exposure model | Any PCE | 1.39 (0.67, 2.91) [13] | Not studied | Not studied |
| Any PCE > 90th percentile relative delivered dose | 4.03 (0.65, 25.10) [4] | Not studied | Not studied | |
| Pesch et al. 2000 (Germany): job- and task-exposure matrix | Any PCE (males): | Not studied | Not studied | |
| Medium exposure | 1.0 (0.7, 1.5) [37] | |||
| High exposure | 1.3 (0.8, 1.7) [47] | |||
| Substantial exposure | 1.8 (1.1, 3.1) [22] | |||
| Miligi et al. 2006 | Any PCE: | Not studied | ||
| Very low/low intensity | 0.6 (0.3, 1.2) [18] | Not reported [3] | ||
| Medium/high intensity | 1.2 (0.6, 2.5) [14] | Not reported [2] | ||
| Seidler et al. 2007 (Germany): job-exposure matrix | PCE, cumulative exposure (ppm-years): | Not studied | ||
| 0 | 1.0 (Referent) [667] | 1.0 (Referent) [33] | ||
| > 0 to ≤ 9.1 | 1.1 (0.5, 2.3) [16] | 1.8 (0.5, 6.7) [3] | ||
| > 9.1 to ≤ 78.8 | 1.0 (0.5, 2.2) [14] | [0] | ||
| > 78.8 | 3.4 (0.7, 17.3) [6] | [0] | ||
| Gold et al. 2010 (United States): all jobs held >12 months, job-exposure matrix | Any PCE | Not studied | Not studied | 1.5 (0.8, 2.9) [16] |
| Cumulative PCE exposure (ppm-weeks): | Not studied | Not studied | ||
| 0 | 1.0 [164] | |||
| 1–353 | 0.3 (0.04, 3.0) [1] | |||
| 354–1,430 | 0.5 (0.1, 4.4) [1] | |||
| 1,431–4,875 | 1.5 (0.4, 5.4) [4] | |||
| 4,876–13,500 | 3.3 (1.2, 9.5) [10] | |||
| Abbreviations: RR, relative risk; SIR, standardized incidence ratio; SMR, standardized mortality ratio. | ||||
Summary of factors considered in evaluating carcinogenicity findings in experimental animals.
| Tumor type | Incidence (dose, sex, strain, route) | Tumor latency, severity, mortality, background rate | Toxicokinetic information | MOA information |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rat mononuclear cell leukemia | Significant increases in both sexes of F344/N (NTP 1986) and F344/DuCrj (JISA 1993) strains; dose-dependent increase in F344/DuCrj males (JISA 1993) | NTP 1986: decreased latency in females; increased severity in both sexes; background rate 56% in males, 36% in females JISA 1993: decreased latency in both sexes; background rate of ~ 20% in both sexes | No information available concerning active moiety(ies) | None hypothesized; studies demonstrating hemolysis and bone marrow toxicity in mice add some support to the biologic plausibility |
| Mouse hepatocellular tumors | Significant, dose-dependent increases in both sexes of B6C3F1 (NTP 1986) and Crj:BDF1 (JISA 1993) strains with inhalation exposures; no continued increase with increasing dose in gavage study of B6C3F1 strain (NCI 1977) | Decreased latency; increased mortality; increased metastases in inhalation studies; background rate of ~ 30% in males, ~ 8% in females | The metabolites TCA and DCA are mouse hepatocarcinogens, alone and in combination | Evidence is insufficient for the hypothesized MOAs evaluated: PPARα activation, mutagenicity, alterations in DNA methylation, oxidative stress secondary to cytotoxicity |
| Mouse hemangiomas, hemangiosarcomas | Significant, dose-dependent increases in males in one bioassay (Crj:BDF1 strain, JISA 1993) | Background rate of 2–4% in both sexes; decreased latency | No information available concerning active moiety(ies) | None hypothesized |
| Rat kidney tumors | Significant trend in males in one bioassay (F344/N strain, NTP 1986) | Low background rate (1/549 among historical controls for facility; ~ 0.2% in 1,968 untreated controls in the NTP program) | GSH conjugation metabolites are likely contributors to renal carcinogenicity | Evidence is insufficient for the hypothesized MOA evaluated: α2u-globulin nephropathy did not meet the U.S. EPA criteria for establishing this MOA; evidence of either |
| Abbreviations: MOA, mode of action; PPARα, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α. | ||||
Figure 2Dose–response relationships for rat mononuclear cell leukemias (A) and mouse hepatocellular tumors (B) in PCE bioassays. Three laboratories evaluated PCE in both mice and rats [oral gavage (NCI 1977); inhalation (JISA 1993; NTP 1986)]. The PBPK model of Chiu and Ginsberg (2011) was used to estimate internal dose for each site, allowing comparison of responses across routes of exposure. The best supported dose metric for mouse liver tumors was total oxidative metabolism in the liver (B), whereas that for rat mononuclear cell leukemia was PCE area under the curve (PCE AUC) in blood (A). The study in Osborne-Mendel rats (NCI 1977) was judged inconclusive because of high rates of respiratory disease and mortality with PCE and, thus, rat data from that study are not presented. Survival-adjusted responses are presented as proportion responding (incidence/number at risk).