Top Banner
Risk Assessment II Dec 9, 2009
23

Risk Assessment II

Mar 23, 2016

Download

Documents

giolla

Risk Assessment II. Dec 9, 2009. For effects other than cancer:. Is there a “safe” dose ?. Dose-Response. Increasing Response. 0. Dose. Threshold. Non-carcinogens N o O bserved A dverse E ffects L evel NOAEL. ACCEPTABLE DAILY INTAKE (ADI) or TOLERABLE DAILY INTAKE (TDI) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Risk Assessment II

Risk Assessment II

Dec 9, 2009

Page 2: Risk Assessment II

Is there a “safe” dose ?

For effects other than cancer:

Page 3: Risk Assessment II

Dose-Response

Dose

Increasing Response

0Threshold

Page 4: Risk Assessment II

Non-carcinogensNo

Observed

Adverse

Effects

Level

NOAEL

Page 5: Risk Assessment II

ACCEPTABLE DAILY INTAKE (ADI) or TOLERABLE DAILY INTAKE (TDI)

The amount of a substance that can be ingested over a lifetime without significant health risk

ADI = NOAEL Safety Factor(s)

Poor quality of data

Safety Factor = 10 x 10 [x 10] [x 10]Inter-speciesAnimal-to-human Intra-species Particularly

inter-individual severe effectvariability

Units: mg/kg/dayBased on most sensitive species and most sensitive end-point

Page 6: Risk Assessment II

Extrapolations

• From short-term studies to lifetime exposure

• From high doses in animal studies to low doses in environmental exposure

• From animals to humans

Page 7: Risk Assessment II

Scale from animal to human

• Scale according to body weight (BW)• Scale according to surface area – (BW)2/3

• Scale according to relative metabolic rates – (BW)3/4

• Biological modeling – physiologically-based (PBPK)

Page 8: Risk Assessment II

Variability • Inter-individual

variation in – Exposure– Metabolism– Repair capacity– Sensitivity– …

Uncertainty: Factors that we do not know or understand fully (yet)

• True magnitude of– Exposure– Metabolism– Repair capacity– Sensitivity

• How to extrapolate from test animals to humans, high to low doses…

• How to combine risks

Page 9: Risk Assessment II

Carcinogens: There exists a “measurable” risk from any exposure,

eg 4.1 x 10 -6 cancer risk for exposure to 1 μg/m3 of CH2Cl2 for a lifetime

Non-carcinogens: A “safe” dose can be determined

Pathogens: An “infectious dose” can be determined- ID50, , - Dose that produces 1 in 104 risk of infection

Each is considered in isolation

Approach has been chemical by chemical.Multiple chemical exposure requires combined risk assessment approach. Multiple sources of exposure need to be accounted for.

Page 10: Risk Assessment II

Combinations

• Binary mixtures• Ternary mixtures• Four- , five-component mixtures• Six, seven, eight….• ...• Complex mixtures

Page 11: Risk Assessment II

The Risk Cup• Food Quality Protection Act (1996)

– Amendment to Food Drugs and Cosmetics Act (1906, 1938)

• “Assess the risk of the pesticide chemical residue [to infants and children] based on…available information concerning the cumulative effects on infants and children of such residues and other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity”

Page 12: Risk Assessment II

Interactions

• Additivity• Synergism• Potentiation• Antagonism

Page 13: Risk Assessment II

Interactions can be expected between chemicals that

• Act by binding to the same receptor• Act through the same mechanism• Require the same enzyme for

activation/detoxication

Page 14: Risk Assessment II

Additivity

• Chemicals A, B, C…N are all toxic• Potency of mixture = Sum of potencies *

concentrations of constituents

• Effecttotal = PotencyA * DoseA + PotencyB * DoseB + PotencyC * DoseC +…..+PotencyN * DoseN

Page 15: Risk Assessment II

Synergism

• The whole is greater than the sum of the individual constituents

Effecttotal >> PotencyA* DoseA + PotencyB* DoseB… +… + PotencyN* DoseN

Page 16: Risk Assessment II

Potentiation

• One constituent A is toxic, the other B is not.

• Effect of the combination A + B is greater than the effect of the active constituent

Effecttotal >> PotencyA* DoseA

where PotencyB = 0

Page 17: Risk Assessment II

Antagonism

• Effect of the whole is less than the sum of the effects of the individual components

Effecttotal << PotencyA* DoseA + PotencyB* DoseB… +… + PotencyN* DoseN

Page 18: Risk Assessment II
Page 19: Risk Assessment II

• Competing risks

Drinking water disinfectant by-products

↔ infectious diseases

Page 20: Risk Assessment II

Comparison of RisksDisabilityAdjustedLifeYears

One DALY = 1 lost year of healthy lifeDisability is weighted by a factor that reflects the severity of the disease on a scale from 0 (perfect health) to 1 (equivalent to death). WHO Global Burden of Disease analysis http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/en/index.html

Page 21: Risk Assessment II
Page 22: Risk Assessment II

Some examples of weighing factors

• Asthma -- 0.043• Blindness – 0.600• Cancer: Liver – 0.20• Cancer: Trachea, bronchus and lung 0.15

– Metastatic 0.75• Cirrhosis of the liver - 0.330• Cleft palate - Cases 0.103• Diarrheal diseases - 0.105• Malaria - 0.191

Page 23: Risk Assessment II

USA, Both sexes, National Center for Health Statistics

Life expectancy at birth

Year of birth

Age at death

Year of birth

Age at death

1900 47.3 1980 73.71950 68.2 1990 75.4

1960 69.7 2000 77.0

1970 70.8 2005 77.82007 77.9