The Use of Biomonitoring Data in Exposure and Human Health Risk Assessments

Abstract

Biomonitoring uses analytic methods that permit the accurate measurement of low levels of environmental chemicals in human tissues. However, depending on the intended use, biomonitoring, like all exposure tools, may not be a stand-alone exposure assessment tool for some of its environmental public health uses. Although biomonitoring data demonstrate that many environmental chemicals are absorbed in human tissues, uncertainty exists regarding if and at what concentrations many of these chemicals cause adverse health outcomes. Moreover, without exposure pathway information, it is difficult to relate biomonitoring results to sources and routes of exposure and develop effective health risk management strategies. In September 2004, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and International Council of Chemical Associations co-sponsored the International Biomonitoring Workshop, which explored the processes and information needed for placing biomonitoring data into perspective for risk assessment purposes, with special emphasis on integrating biomarker measurements of exposure, internal dose, and potential health outcome. Scientists from international governments, academia, and industry recommended criteria for applying biomonitoring data for various uses. Six case studies, which are part of this mini-monograph, were examined: inorganic arsenic, methyl eugenol, organophosphorus pesticides, perfluorooctanesulfonate, phthalates, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. Based on the workshop and follow-up discussions, this overview article summarizes lessons learned, identifies data gaps, outlines research needs, and offers guidance for designing and conducting biomonitoring studies, as well as interpreting biomonitoring data in the context of risk assessment and risk management.

The role of human biological monitoring in health risk assessment

“…• HBM can be used to test research hypotheses, identify knowledge gaps and initiate new research pertaining to exposure sources, pathways and health effects (Albertini et al, 2006;NRC, 2012).…”

“…Additional information regarding PKs as well as toxicity of the chemicals is essential to relate the biomonitoring data to potential health effects (Albertini et al, 2006).…”

“…Other key parameters such as accuracy, linear dynamic range, and long-term precision must be carefully evaluated (Langlois et al, 2014;Magnusson and Örnemark, 2014). Analysis of samples must be carried out with fully validated analytical methods and supported by the use of quality control samples (Albertini et al, 2006;Calafat and Needham 2008;Smolders et al, 2009). Finally, the laboratory should participate in inter-laboratory exercise as and when available (Göen et al, 2012;Schindleret al, 2014;Vandenberg et al, 2014).…”

“…For most of the environmental chemicals, PK and toxicity data from animal experiments and exposure information in humans in conjunction with valid HBM data (in terms of analytical quality, biomarker selection and its stability in the biological matrix, and the relationship between the biomarker to the chemical exposure) are required to relate chemical exposure to health effects (Albertini et al, 2006;NRC, 2006). However, estimates of population health risks can be estimated based on animal toxicity studies, and certainly the HBM concentrations can be compared across time and between different populations, supporting public health interventions (Krewski et al, 2014).…”

Assessing exposure of young children to common endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the home environment: a review and commentary of the questionnaire-based approach

“…Furthermore, multiple samples may be required to accurately classify long-term exposure to EDCs, which have a short half-life in humans or for which exposure is variable (25). The widespread occurrence of plasticisers and flame retardants within standard laboratory equipment and materials used in sample collection also poses a significant risk of sample contamination (26,27).…”