Literature DB >> 8487327

Assessment of the carcinogenic potential of chlorinated water: experimental studies of chlorine, chloramine, and trihalomethanes.

J K Dunnick1, R L Melnick.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Water chlorination has been one of the major disease prevention treatments of this century. While epidemiologic studies suggest an association between cancer in humans and consumption of chlorination byproducts in drinking water, these studies have not been adequate to draw definite conclusions about the carcinogenic potential of the individual byproducts.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the carcinogenic potential of chlorinated or chloraminated drinking water and of four organic trihalomethane byproducts of chlorination (chloroform, bromodichloromethane, chlorodibromomethane, and bromoform) in rats and mice.
METHODS: Bromodichloromethane, chlorodibromomethane, bromoform, chlorine, or chloramine was administered to both sexes of F344/N rats and (C57BL/6 x C3H)F1 mice (hereafter called B6C3F1 mice). Chloroform was given to both sexes of Osborne-Mendel rats and B6C3F1 mice. Chlorine or chloramine was administered daily in the drinking water for 2 years at doses ranging from 0.05 to 0.3 mmol/kg per day. The trihalomethanes were administered by gavage in corn oil at doses ranging from 0.15 to 4.0 mmol/kg per day for 2 years, with the exception of chloroform, which was given for 78 weeks.
RESULTS: The trihalomethanes were carcinogenic in the liver, kidney, and/or intestine of rodents. There was equivocal evidence for carcinogenicity in female rats that received chlorinated or chloraminated drinking water; this evidence was based on a marginal increase in the incidence of mononuclear cell leukemia. Rodents were generally exposed to lower doses of chlorine and chloramine than to the trihalomethanes, but the doses in these studies were the maximum that the animals would consume in the drinking water. The highest doses used in the chlorine and chloramine studies were equivalent to a daily gavage dose of bromodichloromethane that induced neoplasms of the large intestine in rats. In contrast to the results with the trihalomethanes, administration of chlorine or chloramine did not cause a clear carcinogenic response in rats or mice after long-term exposure.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that organic byproducts of chlorination are the chemicals of greatest concern in assessment of the carcinogenic potential of chlorinated drinking water.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8487327     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/85.10.817

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  18 in total

1.  The association of drinking water source and chlorination by-products with cancer incidence among postmenopausal women in Iowa: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  T J Doyle; W Zheng; J R Cerhan; C P Hong; T A Sellers; L H Kushi; A R Folsom
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Environmental exposure, chlorinated drinking water, and bladder cancer.

Authors:  Peter J Goebell; Cristina M Villanueva; Albert W Rettenmeier; Herbert Rübben; Manolis Kogevinas
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2003-12-20       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  EPA's Stage 2 Disinfection Byproducts Rules (DBPR) and Northern Kentucky Water: An Economic and Scientific Review.

Authors:  Hugh Henry
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 2.658

4.  [The causes of urinary bladder cancer and possibilities of prevention].

Authors:  K Golka; A W Rettenmeier; P J Goebell
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 0.639

5.  Drinking water treatment is not associated with an observed increase in neural tube defects in mice.

Authors:  Vanessa E Melin; David W Johnstone; Felicia A Etzkorn; Terry C Hrubec
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 2.513

6.  Chlorination disinfection by-products and pancreatic cancer risk.

Authors:  Minh T Do; Nicholas J Birkett; Kenneth C Johnson; Daniel Krewski; Paul Villeneuve
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 9.031

7.  Triazine herbicide exposure and breast cancer incidence: an ecologic study of Kentucky counties.

Authors:  M K Kettles; S R Browning; T S Prince; S W Horstman
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 8.  Implications for risk assessment of suggested nongenotoxic mechanisms of chemical carcinogenesis.

Authors:  R L Melnick; M C Kohn; C J Portier
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 9.  Drinking water disinfection byproducts: review and approach to toxicity evaluation.

Authors:  G A Boorman
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Case control study of the geographic variability of exposure to disinfectant byproducts and risk for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Gerald E Bove; Peter A Rogerson; John E Vena
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2007-05-29       Impact factor: 3.918

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.