AI Article Synopsis

  • When studying the cancer risks of bitumen emissions, researchers face conflicting results from human, animal, and mechanistic studies, emphasizing the need for accurate real-world exposure validation and controlling confounding factors.
  • Key studies reveal a wide range in cancer incidence, highlighting the importance of synthesizing published research to understand why results vary and to pinpoint critical factors in evaluating cancer hazards of complex petroleum substances.
  • High-quality human hazard data takes precedence in risk assessments, reducing the need for extrapolation and ensuring reliable conclusions, especially when supported by comprehensive, well-designed animal studies that accurately reflect potential worker exposure.

Article Abstract

When assessing cancer hazard and risk associated with a complex petroleum substance, like bitumen emissions, there are often conflicting results related to human, animal and mechanistic studies. Validation of the complex composition to assure that it matches real-world exposures and control of confounders are pivotal factors in study design to allow the necessary read-across during assessments. Several key studies on bitumen emissions in two-year dermal cancer assays reported variable outcomes ranging from high cancer incidence to no cancer incidence. Here, we synthesize findings from published studies to explain the differences and discuss critical factors in cancer hazard evaluation for complex petroleum substances. Using these critical factors, we reviewed relevant human genetic toxicity, mammalian toxicity and mechanistic studies with bitumen to understand the divergence in results. We assess the most reliable and scientifically supported information on the potential carcinogenic hazards of bitumen emissions and comment on quality and completeness of data. Human hazard data are typically considered highest priority because they eliminate the need for interspecies extrapolation and reduce the range of high -to low-dose extrapolation during the risk assessment process. Finally, two well-conducted comprehensive animal studies are discussed that have well-defined test material, exposure concentration and composition representative of worker exposure, evidence of systemic uptake, no confounding exposures and provide consistency across all elements within both studies. Studies that allow effective read-across from human, animal and mechanistic components, control for confounders and are well-validated analytically against workplace exposures, provide the strongest evidence base for evaluating cancer hazard.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2017.1391170DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bitumen emissions
16
complex petroleum
12
cancer hazard
12
assessing cancer
8
hazards bitumen
8
petroleum substances
8
human animal
8
animal mechanistic
8
mechanistic studies
8
control confounders
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!