09.02.2014 Views

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

home edit2 whole TSD November 2002 PDF format - OEHHA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

species, sex and study, in the absence of evidence that the data are not representative. The Innes et<br />

al.(1969) study presents the highest, and thus most sensitive, cancer potency value of 0.061 (mg/kgday)<br />

-1 . The lower 95% confidence bound on the Innes et al. (1969) potency value<br />

also exceeds the potency values derived from Cardy et al. (1979) indicating the mouse strain used by<br />

Innes et al. (1969) may be more sensitive. The small number of animals used in this preliminary study,<br />

however, suggests the possibility this value may be overly conservative. The two q human values for<br />

NDPA in male and female rats derived from Cardy et al. (1979) are close, 0.0032 and 0.0034<br />

(mg/kg-day) -1 , respectively. Since these data were derived from a large, thorough study, the<br />

development of a reference cancer potency value should include these values. The potency estimate<br />

was therefore derived from the geometric mean of the three q human values described above according to<br />

the approach of Anderson et al. (1983). The resulting reference q human is 0.009 (mg/kg-day) -1 .<br />

A unit risk value based upon air concentrations was derived by <strong>OEHHA</strong>/ATES using an assumed<br />

human breathing rate of 20 m 3 /day, 70 kg human body weight, and 100% fractional absorption after<br />

inhalation exposure. The calculated unit risk value is 2.6 E-6 (µg/m 3 ) -1 .<br />

V. REFERENCES<br />

Anderson EL and the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1983. Quantitative<br />

approaches in use to assess cancer risk. Risk Anal 3:277-295.<br />

Argus MF, and Hoch-Ligeti, AM. 1961. Comparative study of the carcinogenic activity of<br />

nitrosamines. J Natl Cancer Inst 27:695-709.<br />

Boyland E, Carted RL, Gorrod JW, Roe FJC. 1968. Carcinogenic properties of certain rubber<br />

additives. Eur J Cancer 4:233-239.<br />

California Department of Health Services (CDHS). 1985. Guidelines for Chemical Carcinogen Risk<br />

Assessment and Their Scientific Rationale. CDHS, Health and Welfare Agency, Sacramento, CA.<br />

California Department of Health Services (CDHS). 1988. Proposition 65 Risk-Specific Levels: N-<br />

Nitrosodiphenylamine. Reproductive and Cancer Hazard Assessment Section, Office of Environmental<br />

Health Hazard Assessment, Berkeley, CA.<br />

Cardy RH, Lijinsky W, Hildebrandt PK. 1979. Neoplastic and nonneoplastic urinary bladder lesions<br />

induced in Fischer 344 rats and B6C3F 1 hybrid mice by N-nitrosodiphenylamine. Ecotoxicol Environ<br />

3:29-35.<br />

Crouch EAC. 1983. Uncertainties in interspecies extrapolation of carcinogenicity. Environ Health<br />

Perspect 5:321-327.<br />

411

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!