4.7 Article

Public health and chronic low chlordecone exposure in Guadeloupe, Part 1: hazards, exposure-response functions, and exposures

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Volume 15, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s12940-016-0160-x

Keywords

Chlordecone; Low-dose; Mode of action; Key-events; Exposure-response function; Risk assessment; Non-mutagenic agent; Endocrine disrupter

Funding

  1. French Ministry in charge of the environmental protection through the Programme National de Recherche sur les Perturbateurs Endocriniens PNRPE (The National Research Programme on Endocrine Disruptors) [11-MRES-PNRPE-3CVS-029]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Inhabitants of Guadeloupe are chronically exposed to low dose of chlordecone via local food. The corresponding health impacts have not been quantified. Nevertheless the public authority implemented an exposure reduction program in 2003. We develop methods for quantifying the health impacts of chlordecone and present the results in 2 articles: 1. hazard identification, exposure-response functions (ERF) and exposure in Guadeloupe, 2. Health impacts and benefits of exposure reduction. Here is the first article. Methods: Relevant data are extracted from publications searched in Medline and Toxline. Available knowledges on mode of action and key-event hazards of chlordecone are used to identify effects of chlordecone that could occur at low dose. Then a linear ERF is derived for each possible effect. From epidemiological data, ERF is the delta relative risk (RR-1) divided by the corresponding delta exposure. From animal studies, ERF is the benchmark response (10 %) divided by the best benchmark dose modeled with BMDS2.4.0. Our goal is to obtain central values for the ERF slopes, applicable to typical human populations, rather than lower or upper bounds in the most sensitive species or sex. Results: We derive ERFs for 3 possible effects at chronic low chlordecone dose: cancers, developmental impairment, and hepatotoxicity. Neurotoxicity in adults is also a possible effect at low dose but we lack quantitative data for the ERF derivation. A renal toxicity ERF is derived for comparison purpose. Two ERFs are based on epidemiological studies: prostate cancer in men aged > 44y (0.0019 per mu g/L-blood) and altered neurodevelopment in boys (-0.32 QIpoint per mu g/Lcord-blood). Two are based on animal studies: liver cancer (2.69 per mg/kg/d), and renal dysfunction in women (0.0022 per mg/kg/d). Conclusion: The methodological framework developed here yields ERFs for central risk estimates for non-genotoxic effects of chemicals; it is robust with regard to models used. This framework can be used generally to derive ERFs suitable for risk assessment and for cost-benefit analysis of public health decisions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available