IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v7y2010i11p4002-4022d10247.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Assessment of the Interindividual Variability of Internal Dosimetry during Multi-Route Exposure to Drinking Water Contaminants

Author

Listed:
  • Mathieu Valcke

    (Département de santé environnementale et santé au travail, Université de Montréal, CP 6128, Succursale Centre-Ville, Montréal, Québec, H3C 3J7, Canada
    Institut national de santé publique du Québec, 190 Boulevard Crémazie Est, Montréal, Québec, H2P 1E2, Canada)

  • Kannan Krishnan

    (Département de santé environnementale et santé au travail, Université de Montréal, CP 6128, Succursale Centre-Ville, Montréal, Québec, H3C 3J7, Canada)

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate inter-individual variability in absorbed and internal doses after multi-route exposure to drinking water contaminants (DWC) in addition to the corresponding variability in equivalent volumes of ingested water, expressed as liter-equivalents (LEQ). A multi-route PBPK model described previously was used for computing the internal dose metrics in adults, neonates, children, the elderly and pregnant women following a multi-route exposure scenario to chloroform and to tri- and tetra-chloroethylene (TCE and PERC). This scenario included water ingestion as well as inhalation and dermal contact during a 30-min bathroom exposure. Monte Carlo simulations were performed and distributions of internal dose metrics were obtained. The ratio of each of the dose metrics for inhalation, dermal and multi-route exposures to the corresponding dose metrics for the ingestion of drinking water alone allowed computation of LEQ values. Mean BW-adjusted LEQ values based on absorbed doses were greater in neonates regardless of the contaminant considered (0.129–0.134 L/kg BW), but higher absolute LEQ values were obtained in average adults (3.6–4.1 L), elderly (3.7–4.2 L) and PW (4.1–5.6 L). LEQ values based on the parent compound’s AUC were much greater than based on the absorbed dose, while the opposite was true based on metabolite-based dose metrics for chloroform and TCE, but not PERC. The consideration of the 95th percentile values of BW-adjusted LEQ did not significantly change the results suggesting a generally low intra-subpopulation variability during multi-route exposure. Overall, this study pointed out the dependency of the LEQ on the dose metrics, with consideration of both the subpopulation and DWC.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathieu Valcke & Kannan Krishnan, 2010. "An Assessment of the Interindividual Variability of Internal Dosimetry during Multi-Route Exposure to Drinking Water Contaminants," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-21, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:7:y:2010:i:11:p:4002-4022:d:10247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/7/11/4002/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/7/11/4002/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wan K. Jo & Clifford P. Weisel & Paul J. Lioy, 1990. "Chloroform Exposure and the Health Risk Associated with Multiple Uses of Chlorinated Tap Water," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 581-585, December.
    2. Wan K. Jo & Clifford P. Weisel & Paul J. Lioy, 1990. "Routes of Chloroform Exposure and Body Burden from Showering with Chlorinated Tap Water," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 575-580, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kenneth T. Bogen, 2013. "Dermal Uptake of 18 Dilute Aqueous Chemicals: In Vivo Disappearance‐Method Measures Greatly Exceed In Vitro‐Based Predictions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(7), pages 1334-1352, July.
    2. Wan K. Jo & Clifford P. Weisel & Paul J. Lioy, 1990. "Chloroform Exposure and the Health Risk Associated with Multiple Uses of Chlorinated Tap Water," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 581-585, December.
    3. Joachim D. Pleil & Andrew B. Lindstrom, 1998. "Sample Timing and Mathematical Considerations for Modeling Breath Elimination of Volatile Organic Compounds," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 585-602, October.
    4. Clifford P. Weisel & Wei Jie Chen, 1994. "Exposure to Chlorination By‐Products from Hot Water Uses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 101-106, February.
    5. David R. Mattie & John H. Grabau & James N. McDougal, 1994. "Significance of the Dermal Route of Exposure to Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 277-284, June.
    6. Mohammad S. Islam & Luhua Zhao & Joseph Zhou & Lilly Dong & James N. McDougal & Gordon L. Flynn, 1996. "Systemic Uptake and Clearance of Chloroform by Hairless Rats Following Dermal Exposure. I. Brief Exposure to Aqueous Solutions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 349-357, June.
    7. Thomas E. McKone & Robert A. Howd, 1992. "Estimating Dermal Uptake of Nonionic Organic Chemicals from Water and Soil: I. Unified Fugacity‐Based Models for Risk Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 543-557, December.
    8. Mohammad S. Islam & Luhua Zhao & James N. McDougal & Gordon L. Flynn, 1995. "Uptake of Chloroform by Skin During Short Exposures to Contaminated Water," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 343-352, June.
    9. Brent Finley & Dennis Paustenbach, 1994. "The Benefits of Probabilistic Exposure Assessment: Three Case Studies Involving Contaminated Air, Water, and Soil," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 53-73, February.
    10. Tine Bizjak & Marco Capodiferro & Deepika Deepika & Öykü Dinçkol & Vazha Dzhedzheia & Lorena Lopez-Suarez & Ioannis Petridis & Agneta A. Runkel & Dayna R. Schultz & Branko Kontić, 2022. "Human Biomonitoring Data in Health Risk Assessments Published in Peer-Reviewed Journals between 2016 and 2021: Confronting Reality after a Preliminary Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-18, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:7:y:2010:i:11:p:4002-4022:d:10247. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.