Toxicological Review for 2-Methylnaphthalene (CAS No. 91-57-6 ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

FOREWORD The purpose of this Toxicological Review is to provide scientific support and rationale for the hazard and dose-response assessment in IRIS pertaining to chronic exposure to 2-methylnaphthalene. It is not intended to be a comprehensive treatise on the chemical or toxicological nature of 2- methylnaphthalene. In Section 6, EPA has characterized its overall confidence in the quantitative and qualitative aspects of hazard and dose response. Matters considered in this characterization include knowledge gaps, uncertainties, quality of data, and scientific controversies. This characterization is presented in an effort to make apparent the limitations of the assessment and to aid and guide the risk assessor in the ensuing steps of the risk assessment process. For other general information about this assessment or other questions relating to IRIS, the reader is referred to EPA’s IRIS Hotline at 202-566-1676. vi
AUTHORS, CONTRIBUTORS, AND REVIEWERS CHEMICAL MANAGER AND AUTHORS Jamie C. Benedict, Ph.D. (chemical manager) National Center for Environmental Assessment Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC Karen Hogan National Center for Environmental Assessment Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC Andrew J. McDougal, Ph.D. Environmental Science Center Syracuse Research Corporation Syracuse, NY Peter R. McClure, Ph.D., DABT Environmental Science Center Syracuse Research Corporation Syracuse, NY REVIEWERS This document and summary information on IRIS have received peer review both by EPA scientists and by independent scientists external to EPA. Subsequent to external review and incorporation of comments, this assessment has undergone an Agency-wide review process whereby the IRIS Program Director has achieved a consensus approval among the Office of Research and Development; Office of Air and Radiation; Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances; Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response; Office of Water; Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation; Office of Children’s Health Protection; Office of Environmental Information; and the Regional Offices. vii
Page 1 and 2: EPA 635/R-03/010 www.epa.gov/iris T
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS — TOXICOLOGICAL REVIEW O
Page 5: LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Distributio
Page 9 and 10: EXTERNAL PEER REVIEWERS James Klaun
Page 11 and 12: Developmental Toxicity Risk Assessm
Page 13 and 14: 2-methylnaphthalene is a component
Page 15 and 16: Wistar rats, indicating that some a
Page 17 and 18: 24 hrs). Maximum irreversible bindi
Page 19 and 20: CYP enzymes catalyze the first comp
Page 21 and 22: atmosphere, piperonyl butoxide, and
Page 23 and 24: Important differences exist in the
Page 25 and 26: 4. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION 4.1. STUDI
Page 27 and 28: from the later study (Murata et al.
Page 29 and 30: significant increased incidence of
Page 31 and 32: hematotoxicity individually. Theref
Page 33 and 34: (score of 1+ on a 0, 1+, 2+, 3+, or
Page 35 and 36: Methylnaphthalene mixtures are used
Page 37 and 38: A subsequent study was performed to
Page 39 and 40: 1998). The inhibition of intracellu
Page 41 and 42: pulmonary alveolar proteinosis requ
Page 43 and 44: eported that 119 or 238 mg/kg of me
Page 45 and 46: alveolar proteinosis is diagnosed b
Page 47 and 48: 1992), compared with the incidence
Page 49 and 50: Table 5. Parenteral (single intrape
Page 51 and 52: 4.5.2. Inhalation Exposure availabl
Page 53 and 54: In addition, in a skin painting stu
Page 55 and 56: 4.7.2. Possible Gender Differences
Page 57 and 58:
dermally exposed to 119 mg/kg methy
Page 59 and 60:
were similarly exposed, the concurr
Page 61 and 62:
mice. For the male mouse data, the
Page 63 and 64:
A 10-fold UF was used to account fo
Page 65 and 66:
mice for 6 minutes to evaluate sens
Page 67 and 68:
6. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS IN THE CHARACT
Page 69 and 70:
The principal study for the RfD (Mu
Page 71 and 72:
Emi, Y; Konishi, Y. (1985) Endogeno
Page 73 and 74:
Melancon, MJ; Rickert, DE; Lech, JJ
Page 75 and 76:
pharmacokinetic model for naphthale
Page 77 and 78:
Willems, BAT; Melnick, RL; Kohn, MC
Page 79 and 80:
APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF EXTERNAL PEE
Page 81 and 82:
Comments: All reviewers agreed that
Page 83 and 84:
accumulation of lipid in the alveol
Page 85 and 86:
type II pneumocytes (Murata et al.,
Page 87 and 88:
APPENDIX B: BENCHMARK DOSE (BMD) AN
Page 89 and 90:
Table B3. Comparison of benchmark d
Page 91 and 92:
intercept = -4.52857 slope = 1 Asym
Page 93 and 94:
Output B2: Quantal-linear fit of lo
Page 95 and 96:
Output B2 (con’d): Quantal-linear
Page 97:
Asymptotic Correlation Matrix of Pa
show all

Toxicological Review for 2-Methylnaphthalene (CAS No. 91-57-6 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?