One TEF concept does not fit all: The case for human risk assessment of polychlorinated biphenyls

Majorie B.M. van Duursen, Karin I. van Ede, Martin van den Berg

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    Abstract

    Human risk assessment of dioxins and dioxin-like compounds relies heavily on toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) that are mainly based on in vivo rodent studies. However, especially for the PCBs there are many uncertainties with respect to the actual dioxin-like activities and subsequent health effects in humans. For example, the relative effect potencies (REPs) for PCB126 are consistently up to two orders of magnitude lower in human cell models than in rodents and rodent cell cultures. For other dioxin-like (DL) PCBs, REPs can often not be obtained in human models due to a lack of AHR-mediated responses. In addition, DL-PCB-related effects such as thyroid disruption are largely attributed to mechanisms that are not (directly) AHR-mediated. Consequently, the AHR-mediated risk in humans for DL-PCBs is likely overestimated in the current TEF concept. The increasing availability of in vitro models using human cells will provide great opportunities to determine human-specific REP/TEFs based on toxicologically relevant endpoints. A better understanding of human-specific responses should lead to more reliable potency estimates of human effects and ultimately improved human risk assessment for DL-PCBs.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)103-108
    Number of pages6
    JournalCurrent Opinion in Toxicology
    Volume2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Feb 2017

    Keywords

    • Dioxins
    • PCBs
    • Human risk assessment
    • Toxic equivalency factor

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'One TEF concept does not fit all: The case for human risk assessment of polychlorinated biphenyls'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this