Antibodies to Toluene Diisocyanate in an Environmentally Exposed Population

Abstract

Residents living near a polyurethane foam manufacturing facility expressed concern to health officials-over chemical emissions from the plnt. Environmental monitoring of ambient air near the plant indicated the presence of toluene diisocyanate (TDI), which was ued in foam producton. Health official collected blood samples from 113 residents and analyzd the blood sera for antibodies to TDI and related diisocnates. Ten ofthe 113 residents (9%) had elevated lewls of IgG or IgE antibodies specfic for one or more diisocyanates. Exposure histories were taken from antibody-positive individuals to identify possible occupational exposure to TDI or the use of diisocaate-containing consumer products. Exposure to TDI.in ambient air may be responsible for the positive antibody responses detected in some residents of the community. Key work: ambient air, antibodies, environmental exposure, toluene diisocyanate (TDI). Environ Health Prspect 106: 665-666 (1998). [Online 11 September 1998] htap://ehpnetl.niehs nih.g!ov/docs/1 998/1 06p665-666orodff pta html:Residents of a community in Randolph County, North Carolina, contacted the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) because of health concerns over possible exposures to chemical emissions from a manufacturing plant in their neighborhood. The facility produced polyurethane foam by reacting a resin, typically a polyether such as polyoxypropylenetriol, with toluene diisocyanate (TDI) and water. Small quantities of an emulsifying agent, a polymerization catalyst, and a silicone lubricant were also added. Emissions from the foam-making process were directed to stacks, which vented them to ambient air. Emissions from the process could also escape from air vents in the building. Foam production occurred in batches, which resulted in episodic releases of emissions.Using a TDI tape meter, ATSDR staff detected TDI in residential ambient air near the facility at concentrations as high as 29 ppb (209 pg/m3). The presence of TDI in ambient air was confirmed by an alternate method in which diisocyanates were captured on glycerol-impregnated filters, chemically derivitized, and analyzed using high performance liquid chromatography. TDI releases were episodic and usually occurred every few days, although releases were sometimes detected as often as twice a day. During TDI releases, air levels were typically elevated for less than 10 min. However, on a few occasions, TDI levels remained elevated for more than 1 hr.

Hazardous air pollutants and asthma.

“…Community exposure to another HAP, toluene diisocyanate, also has been investigated among individuals living near a polyurethane foam manufacturing facility (175). Ambient air sampling near the plant indicated the presence of toluene diisocyanate.…”

Effects of hexamethylene diisocyanate exposure on human airway epithelial cells: in vitro cellular and molecular studies.

“…Although strict standards have been mandated by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration to limit respiratory tract exposure to these chemicals, diisocyanates remain a leading cause of occupational asthma worldwide (1,2). Environmental exposures to diisocyanates have been documented in individuals living near production facilities and may also occur in proximity to end-use settings in residential neighborhoods (3). Hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI), the focus of this study, is one of the most commonly used diisocyanates and is employed in autobody spray paints, the manufacture of spinnable fibers, and the preservation of animal hides (4).…”

Communicating results to community residents: Lessons from recent ATSDR health investigations

“…As a result of the relationships established between ATSDR staff and the community during this previous exposure investigation, the community was very receptive when other ATSDR staff proposed a follow-up epidemiologic study. Similarly, a health investigation of asthma among children potentially exposed to diisocyanates in Glenola, North Carolina was conducted after an earlier ATSDR investigation found evidence of exposure and issued a public health advisory (Orloff et al, 1998;ATSDR, 2001;Middleton et al, 2001;White et al, 2002). In both communities, the concerns of residents about exposure were confirmed and validated before the health investigations were undertaken.…”