Estimation of Benchmark Dose of Lifetime Cadmium Intake for Adverse Renal Effects Using Hybrid Approach in Inhabitants of an Environmentally Exposed River Basin in Japan

The aim of this study is to estimate the reference level of lifetime cadmium intake (LCd) as the benchmark doses (BMDs) and their 95% lower confidence limits (BMDLs) for various renal effects by applying a hybrid approach. The participants comprised 3,013 (1,362 men and 1,651 women) and 278 (129 men and 149 women) inhabitants of the Cd‐polluted and nonpolluted areas, respectively, in the environmentally exposed Kakehashi River basin. Glucose, protein, aminonitrogen, metallothionein, and β₂‐microglobulin in urine were measured as indicators of renal dysfunction. The BMD and BMDL that corresponded to an additional risk of 5% were calculated with background risk at zero exposure set at 5%. The obtained BMDLs of LCd were 3.7 g (glucose), 3.2 g (protein), 3.7 g (aminonitrogen), 1.7 g (metallothionein), and 1.8 g (β₂‐microglobulin) in men and 2.9 g (glucose), 2.5 g (protein), 2.0 g (aminonitrogen), 1.6 g (metallothionein), and 1.3 g (β₂‐microglobulin) in women. The lowest BMDL was 1.7 g (metallothionein) and 1.3 g (β₂‐microglobulin) in men and women, respectively. The lowest BMDL of LCd (1.3 g) was somewhat lower than the representative threshold LCd (2.0 g) calculated in the previous studies. The obtained BMDLs may contribute to further discussion on the health risk assessment of cadmium exposure.     

Influence of Prenatal Mercury Exposure Upon Scholastic and Psychological Test Performance: Benchmark Analysis of a New Zealand Cohort

This paper presents benchmark (BMD) calculations and additional regression analyses of data from a study in which scores from 26 scholastic and psychological tests administered to 237 6- and 7-year-old New Zealand children were correlated with the mercury concentration in their mothers' hair during pregnancy. The original analyses of five test scores found an association between high prenatal mercury exposure and decreased test performance, using category variables for mercury exposure. Our regression analyses, which utilized the actual hair mercury level, did not find significant associations between mercury and children's test scores. However, this finding was highly influenced by a single child whose mother's mercury hair level (86 mgkg) was more than four times that of any other mother. When that child was omitted, results were more indicative of a mercury effect and scores on six tests were significantly associated with the mothers' hair mercury level. BMDs calculated from five tests ranged from 32 to 73 mgkg hair mercury, and corresponding BMDLs (95% lower limits on BMDs) ranged from 17 to 24 mgkg. When the child with the highest mercury level was omitted, BMDs ranged from 13 to 21 mgkg, and corresponding BMDLs ranged from 7.4 to 10 mgkg.     

An International Pooled Analysis for Obtaining a Benchmark Dose for Environmental Lead Exposure in Children

Lead is a recognized neurotoxicant, but estimating effects at the lowest measurable levels is difficult. An international pooled analysis of data from seven cohort studies reported an inverse and supra‐linear relationship between blood lead concentrations and IQ scores in children. The lack of a clear threshold presents a challenge to the identification of an acceptable level of exposure. The benchmark dose (BMD) is defined as the dose that leads to a specific known loss. As an alternative to elusive thresholds, the BMD is being used increasingly by regulatory authorities. Using the pooled data, this article presents BMD results and applies different statistical techniques in the analysis of multistudy data. The calculations showed only a limited variation between studies in the steepness of the dose‐response functions. BMD results were quite robust to modeling assumptions with the best fitting models yielding lower confidence limits (BMDLs) of about 0.1–1.0 μ g/dL for the dose leading to a loss of one IQ point. We conclude that current allowable blood lead concentrations need to be lowered and further prevention efforts are needed to protect children from lead toxicity.     

Benchmark Dose of Lead Inducing Anemia at the Workplace

To estimate the critical dose of lead inducing anemia in humans, the effects of lead on hemoglobin (Hb) and hematocrit (Hct) levels and red blood cell (RBC) count were examined in 388 male lead-exposed workers with blood lead (BPb) levels of 0.05-5.5 (mean 1.3) micromol/L by using the benchmark dose (BMD) approach. The BPb level was significantly related to Hb (regression coefficient beta=-0.276), RBC (beta=-11.35), and Hct (beta=-0.563) among the workers (p < 0.001) when controlling for age and working status. The average BPb levels were significantly higher in the workers with anemia (1.85 micromol/L), based on the WHO criteria, than in those without anemia (1.26 micromol/L). The benchmark dose levels of BPb (i.e., lower 95% confidence limits of BMD), calculated from the K-power model set at an abnormal probability of 5% in unexposed workers and an excess risk of 5% in exposed workers were estimated to be 0.94 micromol/L (19.5 microg/dl) for Hb, 0.94 micromol/L (19.4 microg/dl) for RBC, and 1.43 micromol/L (29.6 microg/dl) for Hct. These findings suggest that reduction in hematopoietic indicators may be initiated at BPbs below the level currently considered without effect.     

Characterizing Dose-Response I: Critical Assessment of the Benchmark Dose Concept

We present a critical assessment of the benchmark dose (BMD) method introduced by Crump⁽¹⁾ as an alternative method for setting a characteristic dose level for toxicant risk assessment. The no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) method has been criticized because it does not use all of the data and because the characteristic dose level obtained depends on the dose levels and the statistical precision (sample sizes) of the study design. Defining the BMD in terms of a confidence bound on a point estimate results in a characteristic dose that also varies with the statistical precision and still depends on the study dose levels.⁽²⁾ Indiscriminate choice of benchmark response level may result in a BMD that reflects little about the dose-response behavior available from using all of the data. Another concern is that the definition of the BMD for the quantal response case is different for the continuous response case. Specifically, defining the BMD for continuous data using a ratio of increased effect divided by the background response results in an arbitrary dependence on the natural background for the endpoint being studied, making comparison among endpoints less meaningful and standards more arbitrary. We define a modified benchmark dose as a point estimate using the ratio of increased effect divided by the full adverse response range which enables consistent placement of the benchmark response level and provides a BMD with a more consistent relationship to the dose-response curve shape.     

Determination of an Occupational Exposure Guideline for Manganese Using the Benchmark Method

An occupational risk assessment for manganese (Mn) was performed based on benchmark dose analysis of data from two epidemiological studies providing dose-response information regarding the potential neurological effects of exposure to airborne Mn below the current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Permissible Exposure Level (PEL) of 5 mg Mn/m3. Based on a review of the scientific evidence regarding the toxicity of Mn, it was determined that the most appropriate measure of exposure to airborne Mn for the subclinical effects measured in these studies is recent (rather than historical or cumulative) concentration of Mn in respirable (rather than total) particulate. For each of the studies analyzed, the individual exposure and response data from the original study had been made available by the investigators. From these two studies benchmark concentrations calculated for eight endpoints ranged from 0.09 to 0.27 mg Mn/m3. From our evaluation of these results, and considering the fact that the subtle, subclinical effects represented by the neurological endpoints tested in these studies do not represent material impairment, we believe an appropriate occupational exposure guideline for manganese would be in the range of 0.1 to 0.3 mg Mn/m3, based on the respirable particulate fraction only, and expressed as an 8-hour time-weighted average.     

Estimation of Potential Health Effects from Acute Exposure to Hydrogen Fluoride Using a "Benchmark Dose" Approach

Communities across the United States are examining the manufacture, use, transport, and storage of hydrogen fluoride (HF) near residential areas as a consequence of a major release of HF in Texas in 1987. Reference exposure levels for routine and accidental HF emissions are calculated using existing animal and human data. The approach employs a logprobit extrapolation of concentration-response data to the 95% lower confidence limit on the toxic concentration producing a "benchmark dose" of 1% response (TC01), called a practical threshold. Species-specific and chemical-specific adjustment factors are applied to develop exposure levels applicable to the general public. Using this method, the 1-hr reference exposure level to protect the public against any irritation from a routine emission (REL-1) is 0.7 ppm and the level to protect against severe irritation from a once-in-a-lifetime (REL-2) release is 2 ppm. This approach is compared to a modified "uncertainty factor" approach.     

A Comparison of Three Methods for Calculating Confidence Intervals for the Benchmark Dose

Various methods exist to calculate confidence intervals for the benchmark dose in risk analysis. This study compares the performance of three such methods in fitting nonlinear dose-response models: the delta method, the likelihood-ratio method, and the bootstrap method. A data set from a developmental toxicity test with continuous, ordinal, and quantal dose-response data is used for the comparison of these methods. Nonlinear dose-response models, with various shapes, were fitted to these data. The results indicate that a few thousand runs are generally needed to get stable confidence limits when using the bootstrap method. Further, the bootstrap and the likelihood-ratio method were found to give fairly similar results. The delta method, however, resulted in some cases in different (usually narrower) intervals, and appears unreliable for nonlinear dose-response models. Since the bootstrap method is more time consuming than the likelihood-ratio method, the latter is more attractive for routine dose-response analysis. In the context of a probabilistic risk assessment the bootstrap method has the advantage that it directly links to Monte Carlo analysis.     

A Simulation Study of the Influence of Study Design on the Estimation of Benchmark Doses for Developmental Toxicity1

The benchmark dose (BMD)⁴ approach is emerging as replacement to determination of the No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) in noncancer risk assessment. This possibility raises the issue as to whether current study designs for endpoints such as developmental toxicity, optimized for detecting pair wise comparisons, could be improved for the purpose of calculating BMDs. In this paper, we examine various aspects of study design (number of dose groups, dose spacing, dose placement, and sample size per dose group) on BMDs for two endpoints of developmental toxicity (the incidence of abnormalities and of reduced fetal weight). Design performance was judged by the mean-squared error (reflective of the variance and bias) of the maximum likelihood estimate (MLE) from the log-logistic model of the 5% added risk level (the likely target risk for a benchmark calculation), as well as by the length of its 95% confidence interval (the lower value of which is the BMD). We found that of the designs evaluated, the best results were obtained when two dose levels had response rates above the background level, one of which was near the ED₀₅, were present. This situation is more likely to occur with more, rather than fewer dose levels per experiment. In this instance, there was virtually no advantage in increasing the sample size from 10 to 20 litters per dose group. If neither of the two dose groups with response rates above the background level was near the ED₀₅, satisfactory results were also obtained, but the BMDs tended to be more conservative (i.e., lower). If only one dose level with a response rate above the background level was present, and it was near the ED₀₅, reasonable results for the MLE and BMD were obtained, but here we observed benefits of larger dose group sizes. The poorest results were obtained when only a single group with an elevated response rate was present, and the response rate was much greater than the ED₀₅. The results indicate that while the benchmark dose approach is readily applicable to the standard study designs and generally observed dose-responses in developmental assays, some minor design modifications would increase the accuracy and precision of the BMD.     

Re-evaluation of the Reference Dose for Methylmercury and Assessment of Current Exposure Levels

Methylmercury (Me-Hg) is widely distributed through freshwater and saltwater food chains and human consumption of fish and shellfish has lead to widespread exposure. Both the U.S. EPA Reference Dose (0.3 μg/kg/day) and the FAO/WHO Permissible Tolerable Weekly Intake (3.3 μg/kg/week) are currently based on the prevention of paraesthesia in adult and older children. However, Me-Hg exposure in utero is known to result in a range of developmental neurologic effects including clinical CNS symptoms and delayed onset of walking. Based on a critical review of developmental toxicity data from human and animal studies, it is concluded that current guidelines for the prevention of paraesthesia are not adequate to address developmental effects. A dose of 0.07 μ/kg/day is suggested as the best estimate of a potential reference dose for developmental effects. Data on nationwide fish consumption rates and Me-Hg levels in fish/seafood weighted by proportion of the catch intended for human consumption are analyzed in a Monte Carlo simulation to derive a probability distribution of background Me-Hg exposure. While various uncertainties in the toxicologic and exposure data limit the precision with which health risk can be estimated, this analysis suggests that at current levels of Me-Hg exposure, a significant fraction of women of childbearing age have exposures above this suggested reference dose.     

Relation Between Benchmark Dose and No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level in Clinical Research: Effects of Daily Alcohol Intake on Blood Pressure in Japanese Salesmen

The benchmark dose (BMD) is defined as the dose that corresponds to a specific change in an adverse response compared to the response in unexposed subjects, and the lower 95% confidence limit is termed the benchmark dose level (BMDL). In this study, the threshold of daily ethanol intake affecting blood pressure was calculated by both the BMD approach and multiple logistic regression analysis to clarify the relation between the BMDL and no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL). Systolic and diastolic blood pressures (SBP and DBP) and daily ethanol intake were explored in 1,100 Japanese salesmen. The SBP and DBP were positively related to daily ethanol intake (p < 0.001) when adjusting for possible confounders such as age, body mass index, and smoking status. The adjusted risk for hypertension (SBP >or= 140 mmHg or DBP >or= 90 mmHg) increased significantly when daily ethanol intake exceeded 60 g/day, and the categorical dose of interest was 60.1-90 g/day. The BMDL and BMD of ethanol intake for increased SBP and DBP were estimated to be approximately 60 and 75 g/day, respectively. These findings suggest that the BMDL and BMD correspond to the NOAEL and lowest-observed-adverse-effect level, respectively, if the sample number of clinical data is large enough to confirm the dose-response association.     

Bootstrap Estimation of Benchmark Doses and Confidence Limits with Clustered Quantal Data

The benchmark dose (BMD) is an exposure level that would induce a small risk increase (BMR level) above the background. The BMD approach to deriving a reference dose for risk assessment of noncancer effects is advantageous in that the estimate of BMD is not restricted to experimental doses and utilizes most available dose-response information. To quantify statistical uncertainty of a BMD estimate, we often calculate and report its lower confidence limit (i.e., BMDL), and may even consider it as a more conservative alternative to BMD itself. Computation of BMDL may involve normal confidence limits to BMD in conjunction with the delta method. Therefore, factors, such as small sample size and nonlinearity in model parameters, can affect the performance of the delta method BMDL, and alternative methods are useful. In this article, we propose a bootstrap method to estimate BMDL utilizing a scheme that consists of a resampling of residuals after model fitting and a one-step formula for parameter estimation. We illustrate the method with clustered binary data from developmental toxicity experiments. Our analysis shows that with moderately elevated dose-response data, the distribution of BMD estimator tends to be left-skewed and bootstrap BMDL s are smaller than the delta method BMDL s on average, hence quantifying risk more conservatively. Statistically, the bootstrap BMDL quantifies the uncertainty of the true BMD more honestly than the delta method BMDL as its coverage probability is closer to the nominal level than that of delta method BMDL. We find that BMD and BMDL estimates are generally insensitive to model choices provided that the models fit the data comparably well near the region of BMD. Our analysis also suggests that, in the presence of a significant and moderately strong dose-response relationship, the developmental toxicity experiments under the standard protocol support dose-response assessment at 5% BMR for BMD and 95% confidence level for BMDL.     

Estimation of a Benchmark Dose in the Presence or Absence of Hormesis Using Posterior Averaging

U.S. Environment Protection Agency benchmark doses for dichotomous cancer responses are often estimated using a multistage model based on a monotonic dose‐response assumption. To account for model uncertainty in the estimation process, several model averaging methods have been proposed for risk assessment. In this article, we extend the usual parameter space in the multistage model for monotonicity to allow for the possibility of a hormetic dose‐response relationship. Bayesian model averaging is used to estimate the benchmark dose and to provide posterior probabilities for monotonicity versus hormesis. Simulation studies show that the newly proposed method provides robust point and interval estimation of a benchmark dose in the presence or absence of hormesis. We also apply the method to two data sets on carcinogenic response of rats to 2,3,7,8‐tetrachlorodibenzo‐p‐dioxin.     

Influence of Distribution of Animals between Dose Groups on Estimated Benchmark Dose and Animal Welfare for Continuous Effects

The benchmark dose (BMD) approach is increasingly used as a preferred approach for dose–effect analysis, but standard experimental designs are generally not optimized for BMD analysis. The aim of this study was to evaluate how the use of unequally sized dose groups affects the quality of BMD estimates in toxicity testing, with special consideration of the total burden of animal distress. We generated continuous dose–effect data by Monte Carlo simulation using two dose–effect curves based on endpoints with different shape parameters. Eighty‐five designs, each with four dose groups of unequal size, were examined in scenarios ranging from low‐ to high‐dose placements and with a total number of animals set to 40, 80, or 200. For each simulation, a BMD value was estimated and compared with the “true” BMD. In general, redistribution of animals from higher to lower dose groups resulted in an improved precision of the calculated BMD value as long as dose placements were high enough to detect a significant trend in the dose–effect data with sufficient power. The improved BMD precision and the associated reduction of the number of animals exposed to the highest dose, where chemically induced distress is most likely to occur, are favorable for the reduction and refinement principles. The result thereby strengthen BMD‐aligned design of experiments as a means for more accurate hazard characterization along with animal welfare improvements.     

Estimation of Benchmark Dose as the Threshold Amount of Alcohol Consumption for Blood Pressure in Japanese Workers

In order to determine the threshold amount of alcohol consumption for blood pressure, we calculated the benchmark dose (BMD) of alcohol consumption and its 95% lower confidence interval (BMDL) in Japanese workers. The subjects consisted of 4,383 males and 387 females in a Japanese steel company. The target variables were systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures. The effects of other potential covariates such as age and body mass index were adjusted by including these covariates in the multiple linear regression models. In male workers, BMD/BMDL for alcohol consumption (g/week) at which the probability of an adverse response was estimated to increase by 5% relative to no alcohol consumption, were 396/315 (systolic blood pressure), 321/265 (diastolic blood pressure), and 326/269 (mean arterial pressures). These values were based on significant regression coefficients of alcohol consumption. In female workers, BMD/BMDL for alcohol consumption based on insignificant regression coefficients were 693/134 (systolic blood pressure), 199/90 (diastolic blood pressure), and 267/77 (mean arterial pressure). Therefore, BMDs/BMDLs in males were more informative than those in females as there was no significant relationship between alcohol and blood pressure in females. The threshold amount of alcohol consumption determined in this study provides valuable information for preventing alcohol-induced hypertension.     

Role of the Standard Deviation in the Estimation of Benchmark Doses with Continuous Data

For continuous data, risk is defined here as the proportion of animals with values above a large percentile, e.g., the 99th percentile or below the 1st percentile, for the distribution of values among control animals. It is known that reducing the standard deviation of measurements through improved experimental techniques will result in less stringent (higher) doses for the lower confidence limit on the benchmark dose that is estimated to produce a specified risk of animals with abnormal levels for a biological effect. Thus, a somewhat larger (less stringent) lower confidence limit is obtained that may be used as a point of departure for low-dose risk assessment. It is shown in this article that it is important for the benchmark dose to be based primarily on the standard deviation among animals, s(a), apart from the standard deviation of measurement errors, s(m), within animals. If the benchmark dose is incorrectly based on the overall standard deviation among average values for animals, which includes measurement error variation, the benchmark dose will be overestimated and the risk will be underestimated. The bias increases as s(m) increases relative to s(a). The bias is relatively small if s(m) is less than one-third of s(a), a condition achieved in most experimental designs.     

Influence of Distribution of Animals between Dose Groups on Estimated Benchmark Dose and Animal Distress for Quantal Responses

Increasingly, dose‐response data are being evaluated with the benchmark dose (BMD) approach rather than by the less precise no‐observed‐adverse‐effect‐level (NOAEL) approach. However, the basis for designing animal experiments, using equally sized dose groups, is still primed for the NOAEL approach. The major objective here was to assess the impact of using dose groups of unequal size on both the quality of the BMD and overall animal distress. We examined study designs with a total number of 200 animals distributed in four dose groups employing quantal data generated by Monte Carlo simulations. Placing more animals at doses close to the targeted BMD provided an estimate of BMD that was slightly better than the standard design with equally sized dose groups. In situations involving a clear dose‐response, this translates into fewer animals receiving high doses and thus less overall animal distress. Accordingly, in connection with risk and safety assessment, animal distress can potentially be reduced by distributing the animals appropriately between dose groups without decreasing the quality of the information obtained.     

Design of Developmental Toxicity Studies for Assessing Joint Effects of Dose and Duration

In the assessment of developmental and reproductive effects, the timing and duration of exposures to chemical compounds or other environmental contaminants are of particular interest, as the gestational cycle is known to have periods of increased sensitivity. The goal of this research is to identify optimal experimental designs for conducting developmental toxicity studies when the effects of both exposure level and duration of exposure are of interest. The elements of the study design considered in this evaluation are the allocation of animals to dose-duration exposure groups and the determination of the most efficient intermediate exposure levels. The optimality of various designs is assessed via the accuracy of the estimated excess risk as well as testing criteria. Simulation studies are conducted to compare these criteria and determine optimal design strategies under various underlying dose-response patterns. Asymptotic results are also derived to lend support to the simulation studies.     

A Comparison of Methods for Estimating the Benchmark Dose Based on Overdispersed Data from Developmental Toxicity Studies

Developmental anomalies resulting from prenatal toxicity can be manifested in terms of both malformations among surviving offspring and prenatal death. Although these two endpoints have traditionally been analyzed separately in the assessment of risk, multivariate methods of risk characterization have recently been proposed. We examined this and other issues in developmental toxicity risk assessment by evaluating the accuracy and precision of estimates of the effective dose ( ED ₀₅) and the benchmark dose ( BMD ₀₅) using computer simulation. Our results indicated that different variance structures (Dirichlet-trinomial and generalized linear model) used to characterize overdispersion yielded comparable results when fitting joint dose response models based on generalized estimating equations. (The choice of variance structure in separate modeling was also not critical.) However, using the Rao-Scott transformation to eliminate overdispersion tended to produce estimates of the ED ₀₅ with reduced bias and mean squared error. Because joint modeling ensures that the ED ₀₅ for overall toxicity (based on both malformations and prenatal death) is always less than the ED ₀₅ for either malformations or prenatal death, joint modeling is preferred to separate modeling for risk assessment purposes.     

A Health Risk Benchmark for the Neurologic Effects of Styrene: Comparison with NOAEL/LOAEL Approach

Benchmark dose (BMD) analysis was used to estimate an inhalation benchmark concentration for styrene neurotoxicity. Quantal data on neuropsychologic test results from styrene-exposed workers [Mutti et al. (1984). American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 5, 275-286] were used to quantify neurotoxicity, defined as the percent of tested workers who responded abnormally to > or = 1, > or = 2, or > or = 3 out of a battery of eight tests. Exposure was based on previously published results on mean urinary mandelic- and phenylglyoxylic acid levels in the workers, converted to air styrene levels (15, 44, 74, or 115 ppm). Nonstyrene-exposed workers from the same region served as a control group. Maximum-likelihood estimates (MLEs) and BMDs at 5 and 10% response levels of the exposed population were obtained from log-normal analysis of the quantal data. The highest MLE was 9 ppm (BMD = 4 ppm) styrene and represents abnormal responses to > or = 3 tests by 10% of the exposed population. The most health-protective MLE was 2 ppm styrene (BMD = 0.3 ppm) and represents abnormal responses to > or = 1 test by 5% of the exposed population. A no observed adverse effect level/lowest observed adverse effect level (NOAEL/LOAEL) analysis of the same quantal data showed workers in all styrene exposure groups responded abnormally to > or = 1, > or = 2, or > or = 3 tests, compared to controls, and the LOAEL was 15 ppm. A comparison of the BMD and NOAEL/LOAEL analyses suggests that at air styrene levels below the LOAEL, a segment of the worker population may be adversely affected. The benchmark approach will be useful for styrene noncancer risk assessment purposes by providing a more accurate estimate of potential risk that should, in turn, help to reduce the uncertainty that is a common problem in setting exposure levels.