Zainab Hasan1, Danelle Rolle-McFarland2, Yingzi Liu3, Jieqiong Zhou4, Farshad Mostafaei5, Yan Li6, Qiyuan Fan7, Yuanzhong Zhou6, Wei Zheng1, Linda H Nie1, Ellen M Wells8. 1. School of Health Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA. 2. Department of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. 4. School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA. 6. School of Public Health, Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, Guizhou, China. 7. Zunyi Medical and Pharmaceutical College, Zunyi, Guizhou, China. 8. School of Health Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA. Electronic address: wells54@purdue.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Aluminum (Al) is a neurotoxicant; however, efforts to understand Al toxicity are limited by the lack of a quantitative biomarker of cumulative exposure. Bone Al measurements may address this need. Here, we describe and compare non-invasive bone Al measurements with fingernail Al and Al cumulative exposure indices (CEIs). METHODS: We completed a cross-sectional study of 43 factory workers in Zunyi, China. Bone Al measurements were taken with a compact in-vivo neutron activation analysis system (IVNAA). Fingernail samples were analyzed using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. CEIs, based on self-reported work history and prior literature, were calculated for the prior 5, 10, 15, 20 years and lifetime work history. Linear regressions adjusted for age and education compared fingernail Al and Al CEIs with bone Al. RESULTS: Median (interquartile range (IQR)) Al measurements were: 15 μg/g dry bone (IQR = 28) for bone Al; 34.9 μg/g (43.3) for fingernail; and 24 (20) for lifetime CEI. In adjusted regression models, an increase in 15-year CEI was significantly associated with increased bone Al (β = 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.16, 1.66). Associations of bone Al with 10- and 20-year CEI were approaching statistical significance (β = 0.98, 95% CI: -0.14, 2.1; β = 0.59, 95% CI: -0.01, 1.18, respectively). Other models were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Bone Al was significantly associated with 15-year Al CEI, but not other Al CEIs or fingernail Al. Bone Al may be a useful measure of cumulative, rather than short-term, Al exposure. Additional refinement of this method is ongoing.
OBJECTIVES:Aluminum (Al) is a neurotoxicant; however, efforts to understand Altoxicity are limited by the lack of a quantitative biomarker of cumulative exposure. Bone Al measurements may address this need. Here, we describe and compare non-invasive bone Al measurements with fingernail Al and Al cumulative exposure indices (CEIs). METHODS: We completed a cross-sectional study of 43 factory workers in Zunyi, China. Bone Al measurements were taken with a compact in-vivo neutron activation analysis system (IVNAA). Fingernail samples were analyzed using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. CEIs, based on self-reported work history and prior literature, were calculated for the prior 5, 10, 15, 20 years and lifetime work history. Linear regressions adjusted for age and education compared fingernail Al and Al CEIs with bone Al. RESULTS: Median (interquartile range (IQR)) Al measurements were: 15 μg/g dry bone (IQR = 28) for bone Al; 34.9 μg/g (43.3) for fingernail; and 24 (20) for lifetime CEI. In adjusted regression models, an increase in 15-year CEI was significantly associated with increased bone Al (β = 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.16, 1.66). Associations of bone Al with 10- and 20-year CEI were approaching statistical significance (β = 0.98, 95% CI: -0.14, 2.1; β = 0.59, 95% CI: -0.01, 1.18, respectively). Other models were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Bone Al was significantly associated with 15-year Al CEI, but not other Al CEIs or fingernail Al. Bone Al may be a useful measure of cumulative, rather than short-term, Al exposure. Additional refinement of this method is ongoing.
Authors: Bernard van Vuuren; Hendrik Johannes van Heerden; Evert Zinzen; Piet Becker; Romain Meeusen Journal: Ind Health Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 2.179
Authors: Gregg E Dinse; Todd A Jusko; Lindsey A Ho; Kaushik Annam; Barry I Graubard; Irva Hertz-Picciotto; Frederick W Miller; Brenda W Gillespie; Clarice R Weinberg Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2014-03-04 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Calvin C Willhite; Nataliya A Karyakina; Robert A Yokel; Nagarajkumar Yenugadhati; Thomas M Wisniewski; Ian M F Arnold; Franco Momoli; Daniel Krewski Journal: Crit Rev Toxicol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 5.635
Authors: Rachel Grashow; Jinming Zhang; Shona C Fang; Marc G Weisskopf; David C Christiani; Jennifer M Cavallari Journal: J Occup Environ Hyg Date: 2014 Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Walter J Lukiw; Theodore P A Kruck; Maire E Percy; Aileen I Pogue; Peter N Alexandrov; William J Walsh; Nathan M Sharfman; Vivian R Jaber; Yuhai Zhao; Wenhong Li; Catherine Bergeron; Frank Culicchia; Zhide Fang; Donald R C McLachlan Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Parkinsonism Date: 2018-11-29