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.

incidence data on male rats for three exposures beyond controls. CDHS (1990) chose to develop<br />

cancer risk estimates for VC using both the human and animal data described above.<br />

Methodology<br />

Human-derived risk estimates<br />

The review of the epidemiological studies strongly suggests a causal association between vinyl chloride<br />

and several different types of cancer, including liver, lung, and brain. However, none of the<br />

occupational cohort studies presented exposure data for a large enough cohort to derive a<br />

dose-response curve; so the CDHS (1990) analysis used historical industrial hygiene data to reconstruct<br />

a range of likely exposures, from which risk estimates can be extrapolated.<br />

This risk analysis proceeds by selecting the Waxweiler et al. (1976) study of 1294 workers who<br />

experienced high sustained exposures to vinyl chloride and who were followed long enough (10 years)<br />

to develop substantial numbers of cancers that appeared to be related to the exposure. The<br />

retrospective estimates of Barnes et al. (1976) for the relevant industrial processes furnished<br />

concentrations of the exposures of vinyl chloride, having an overall average value of 647 ppm. The<br />

analysis converts these annual average exposure estimates to a lifetime daily equivalent tissue exposure<br />

of 3.6 ppm on the assumption of a saturable metabolic process (Michaelis-Menten) leading to active<br />

carcinogens. This is based on extrapolated measurements of binding rates to macromolecules (Gehring<br />

et al. 1977). The seven liver cancer deaths reported for that cohort project to a lifetime risk of .039<br />

(.089 upper confidence limit) per worker for liver cancers. That risk divided by the overall lifetime daily<br />

equivalent of effective exposure yields unit risk estimates for that malignancy.<br />

The calculations provided the following upper confidence limits (UCL) on unit risks: 2.5 × 10 -5 ppb -1 for<br />

liver cancers, and 4.5 × 10 -5 ppb -1 for three sites of cancer combined, liver, lung and brain. Each of<br />

these three sites of cancer had a significantly elevated SMR when calculated for a 15-year follow up<br />

time. The unit risks calculated in this manner are about six times greater than would be calculated by<br />

using actual exposures instead of the effective exposures that take account of the metabolic saturation in<br />

the tissue.<br />

Animal-derived risk estimates<br />

The animal bioassay-based quantitative risk assessment analyses performed by CDHS (1990) used the<br />

computer program GLOBAL86 to calculate potential risks using a linearized multistage procedure that<br />

were associated with vinyl chloride exposure. Significant trends for liver angiosarcoma dominated the<br />

results of the modeling. All three analyses of female rats and two of the three analyses of male rats met<br />

the statistical criterion (p > 0.05) for goodness of fit of the dose-dependent response of liver<br />

angiosarcoma (LAS) to vinyl chloride. In addition, the following experimental groups met that criterion:<br />

lung carcinoma in the Swiss mice of Drew et al. (1983), lung angiosarcoma in the Wistar rats of Bi et<br />

al. (1985), and mammary tumors in both the Sprague Dawley rats of Maltoni et al. (1984) and the<br />

F-344 rats of Drew et al. (1985).<br />

561

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!