Biomonitoring Equivalents for bisphenol A (BPA)
Introduction
Interpretation of measurements of concentrations of chemicals in samples of urine or blood from individuals in the general population is hampered by the general lack of screening criteria for evaluation of such biomonitoring data in a health risk context. Without such screening criteria, biomonitoring data can be interpreted in terms of exposure trends, but cannot be used to evaluate which chemicals may be of concern in the context of current risk assessments. Such screening criteria would ideally be based on robust datasets relating potential adverse effects to biomarker concentrations in human populations (see, for example, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) blood lead level of concern; see http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/). However, development of such epidemiologically-based screening criteria is a resource and time-intensive effort. As an interim approach, the development of Biomonitoring Equivalents (BEs) has been proposed, and guidelines for the derivation and communication of these values have been developed (Hays et al., 2008, 2007; LaKind et al., 2008). Such an interpretive tool, in the form of biological exposure indices (BEIs), has been developed by the ACGIH for a number of chemicals (e.g., ACGIH, 2007).
A BE is defined as the concentration or range of concentrations of chemical in a biological medium (blood, urine, or other medium) that is consistent with an existing health-based exposure guidance value such as a reference dose (RfD) or tolerable daily intake (TDI). Its estimation is based on existing chemical-specific pharmacokinetic data (animal or human) and the point of departure (POD) used in the derivation of an exposure guidance value (such as the RfD or TDI) (Hays et al., 2008). BEs should be used as screening tools to allow an assessment of biomonitoring data to evaluate which chemicals have large, small, or no margins of safety compared to existing risk assessments and exposure guidance values. Robustness of a BE value relies on the underlying exposure guidance values and pharmacokinetic data used to derive it.
This document presents derivation of BE values for 2,2-bis(4-hydroxyphenyl)propane, also known as bisphenol A (BPA; Chemical Abstracts Services [CAS] Registry number 80-05-7). BPA is a monomer used in the production of polycarbonate (PC) plastics and epoxy-phenolic resins. Polycarbonates are used extensively in food containers: e.g. water bottles, plates, and mugs. Epoxy-phenolic resins are used as an internal, protective lining or coating of cans for foods and beverages (Health Canada, 2008, EFSA, 2006). Because of its wide use in food packaging and food containers, BPA has the potential to leach into foods, and widespread exposure to low levels of BPA in the general population has been confirmed through biomonitoring studies (Dekant and Völkel, 2008, Calafat et al., 2005, Calafat et al., 2008). Oral exposure is expected to be the predominant route of exposure because of the low vapor pressure of BPA and its use patterns (Dekant and Völkel, 2008).
Section snippets
Exposure guidance values, critical effects, and mode of action
BPA has been the subject of numerous risk assessment reviews, with increased attention over the last decade related to evaluating its potential for producing adverse health effects through an endocrine disruption mechanism (Health Canada, 2008, EFSA, 2006, EFSA, 2008, CERHR, 2008). Table 1 presents the available guidance values derived for BPA. In each case, the POD, the toxicological endpoint of interest, and the applied uncertainty factors are identified. The provisional tolerable daily
Sources of variability and uncertainty
The BE derived in this document relates to the total BPA in urine and was based on the human data of Völkel et al., 2002, Völkel et al., 2005. These data and thus the calculated BE values correspond to the total BPA in urine – which reflects the sum total of free BPA and BPA-G. The free BPA in urine would appear to be very low (less than 2% of applied dose) and probably unlikely to be quantitated in a reproducible manner.
One of the sources of variability and uncertainty associated with the BE
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments
Funding for this project was provided under a grant from Health Canada. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of Health Canada. This BE dossier has undergone an independent peer-review to assure the methods employed here are consistent with the guidelines for derivation (Hays et al., 2008) and communication (LaKind et al., 2008) of Biomonitoring Equivalents and that the best available chemical-specific data was used in calculating the
References (46)
- et al.
Biomonitoring equivalents (BE) dossier for 2, 4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 92, 4-D) (CAS No. 94–75-7)
Regul Toxicol Pharm
(2008) - et al.
Derivation of biomonitoring equivalents for di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (CAS No. 117–81-7)
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
(2009) - et al.
Human exposure to bisphenol A by biomonitoring: methods, results and assessment of environmental exposures
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
(2008) - et al.
An evaluation of the possible carcinogenicity of bisphenol A to humans
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
(2002) - et al.
Guidelines for the derivation of biomonitoring equivalents: report from the biomonitoring equivalents expert workshop
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
(2008) - et al.
Development of a physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model for bisphenol A in pregnant mice
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
(2007) - et al.
Guidelines for the communication of biomonitoring equivalents: report from the biomonitoring equivalents expert workshop
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
(2008) - et al.
Bisphenol A levels in blood depend on age and exposure
Toxicol. Lett.
(2009) - et al.
Longitudinal examination of 24-h urinary iodine excretion in schoolchildren as a sensitive, hydration status-independent research tool for studying iodine status
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
(2006) - et al.
Anthropometry-based reference values for 24-h urinary creatinine excretion during growth and their use in endocrine and nutritional research
Am. J. Clin. Nutr.
(2002)
Metabolism and disposition of bisphenol A in female rats
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
Daily urinary excretion of bisphenol A
Environ. Health Preventive Medicine
Urinary creatinine concentrations in the US population: implications for urinary biologic monitoring measurements
Environ. Health Perspect.
Urinary concentrations of bisphenol A and 4-nonylphenol in a human reference population
Environ Health Perspect.
Exposure of the US population to bisphenol A and 4-tertiary-octylphenol: 2003–2004
Environ. Health Perspect.
Pharmacokinetic scaling of bisphenol A by species-invariant time methods
Xenobiotica
Predicting plasma concentrations of bisphenol A in children younger than 2 years of age after typical feeding schedules, using a physiologically based toxicokinetic model
Environ. Health Perspect.
Comparison of uncertainties related to standardization of urine samples with volume and creatinine concentration
Ann. Occup. Hyg.
Cited by (65)
Catalytic oxidation of Bisphenol A with Co<sup>3+</sup> rich spinel Co<inf>3</inf>O<inf>4</inf>: Performance evaluation with peroxymonosulfate activation and mineralization mechanism
2023, Journal of Environmental Chemical EngineeringExposure to Bisphenol A increases malignancy risk of thyroid nodules in overweight/obese patients
2023, Environmental PollutionHuman biomonitoring initiative (HBM4EU): Human biomonitoring guidance values (HBM-GVs) derived for bisphenol A
2021, Environment InternationalConcentrations of bisphenol-A in adults from the general population: A systematic review and meta-analysis
2021, Science of the Total EnvironmentCitation Excerpt :The first step in the assessment of potential health hazards associated with BPA is the evaluation of the level of exposure of human populations to this endocrine-disrupting chemical compound. Remarkably, none of the studies included in this meta-analysis presented BPA concentrations above, or even close, to the reference HBM-I value of 200 μg/l defined by German Human Biomonitoring Commission, or greater than the biomonitoring equivalent (BE) value of 2000 μg/l urine defined by the US EPA, corresponding to the intake of a tolerable reference dose (RfD) of 50 μg/kg‧d (Aylward et al., 2013; Kannan et al., 2010). Of note, the German Human Biomonitoring Commission defined reference values based on a TDI of 50 μg/kg‧d, before the 2015 BPA safety re-assessment, which led the EFSA to temporarily reduce the tolerable threshold (t-TDI) to 4 μg/kg‧d. Thus, HBM reference values might be revised in the future to reflect such stricter criteria.