The threshold of toxicological concern for insufficiently explored chemicals occurring in drinking water during transportation

View or download the full article: 
PDF icon health-risk-analysis-2023-3-6.pdf
UDC: 
614.7
DOI: 
10.21668/health.risk/2023.3.06.eng
Authors: 

A.V. Alekseeva, O.N. Savostikova

Organization: 

Centre for Strategic Planning and Management of Biomedical Health Risks, 10 Pogodinskaya St., build. 1, Moscow, 119121, Russian Federation

Abstract: 

Finding solutions to issues of drinking water safety is a significant component in activities aimed at public health protection. In accordance with sanitary-epidemiological requirements, drinking water, in particular, should be harmless as regards its chemical composition and have favorable organoleptic properties. It is especially vital to identify risk factors for public health associated with drinking water quality. Supplying high-quality drinking water to population is a relevant problem associated, among other things, with use of new materials and reagents. The major challenge posed by their hygienic assessment is a potential growth in human health risks caused by consuming tap drinking water contaminated with migrating organic compounds. Although each of them has been detected in low concentrations, they can cause adverse chronic health outcomes.

The Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) is a powerful tool of risk assessment. It is based on identifying a threshold value of effects produced on human health by chemicals for which no hygienic standards have been developed so far. Below such a threshold, there is very low (95 %) likelihood of a health risk being higher than its acceptable levels. An idea of some exposure levels unable to cause adverse health outcomes is embedded in establishing maximum permissible levels (MPLs) for chemicals with known toxicological profiles. The TTC enlarges this concept by assuming that the minimum value can be identified for many chemicals based on their composition even if there is no comprehensive database on their toxicity. The TTC can be used for evaluating up-to-date materials applied in drinking water supply in order to detect risks for human health caused by consumption of drinking water that had contacts with them. Such risk assessment relies on the results of examining water extracts and involves identifying priority chemicals for their further investigation and control.

Keywords: 
water supply, drinking water, hygienic assessment of polymer materials, threshold of toxicological concern, polymers, migration, water-related risk
Alekseeva A.V., Savostikova O.N. The threshold of toxicological concern for insufficiently explored chemicals occurring in drinking water during transportation. Health Risk Analysis, 2023, no. 3, pp. 49–61. DOI: 10.21668/health.risk/2023.3.06.eng
References: 
  1. Rakhmanin Yu.A. Pollution of the water ecosystems and the problems of the drinking water quality. Vestnik RAEN, 2022, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 38–44. DOI: 10.52531/1682-1696-2022-22-4-38-44 (in Russian).
  2. Rakhmanin Yu.A. Updating the problems of human ecology and environmental health and the ways of solving them. Gigiena i sanitariya, 2012, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 4–8 (in Russian).
  3. Rakhmanin Yu.A., Mikhailova R.I., Alekseeva A.V. Butilirovannye pit'evye vody kak faktor povysheniya kachestva zhizni [Bottled drinking water as a factor in improving the quality of life]. Kontrol' kachestva produktsii, 2015, no. 9. pp. 14–19 (in Russian).
  4. Rakhmanin Yu.A., Levanchuk A.V., Kopytenkova O.I., Frolova N.M., Sazonova A.M. Determination of additional health risk due to pollutants in ambient air during operation of road-vehicles complex. Gigiena i sanitariya, 2018, vol. 97, no. 12, pp. 1171–1178. DOI: 10.18821/0016-9900-2018-97-12-1171-1178 (in Russian).
  5. Kuzmin S.V., Dodina N.S., Shashina T.A., Kislitsin V.A., Pinigin M.A., Budarina O.V. The impact of atmospheric pollution on public health: diagnosis, assessment, and prevention. Gigiena i sanitariya, 2022, vol. 101, no. 10, pp. 1145–1150. DOI: 10.47470/0016-9900-2022-101-10-1145-1150 (in Russian).
  6. Rakhmanin Yu.A., Ivanov S.I., Novikov S.M., Revazova Yu.A., Rusakov N.V. Topical problems of the comprehen-sive hygienic characterization of urban environmental factors and their influence on the population's health. Gigiena i sanitariya, 2007, no. 5, pp. 5–7 (in Russian).
  7. Rakhmanin Yu.A., Onishchenko G.G. Hygienic assessment of drinking water supply of the population of the Russian Federation: problems and the way their rational decision. Gigiena i sanitariya, 2022, vol. 101, no. 10, pp. 1158–1166. DOI: 10.47470/0016-9900-2022-101-10-1158-1166 (in Russian).
  8. Kurwadkar S., Dane J., Kanel S.R., Nadagouda M.N., Cawdrey R.W., Ambade B., Struckhoff G.C., Wilkin R. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in water and wastewater: A critical review of their global occurrence and distribution. Sci. Total Environ., 2022, vol. 809, pp. 151003. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151003
  9. Xue J., Samaei S.H., Chen J., Doucet A., Ng K.T.W. What have we known so far about microplastics in drinking water treatment? A timely review. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2022, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 58. DOI: 10.1007/s11783-021-1492-5
  10. Acarer S. Abundance and characteristics of microplastics in drinking water treatment plants, distribution systems, water from refill kiosks, tap waters and bottled waters. Sci. Total Environ., 2023, vol. 884, pp. 163866. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163866
  11. Wee S.Y., Aris A.Z., Yusoff F.M., Praveena S.M. Occurrence of multiclass endocrine disrupting compounds in a drinking water supply system and associated risks. Sci. Rep., 2020, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 17755. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74061-5
  12. de Aquino S.F., Brandt E.M.F., Bottrel S.E.C., Gomes F.B.R., de Queiroz Silva S. Affiliations expand S.Q. Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals and Endocrine Disrupting Compounds in Brazilian Water and the Risks They May Represent to Human Health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 2021, vol. 18, no. 22, pp. 11765. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182211765
  13. Lazofsky A., Buckley B. Recent Trends in Multiclass Analysis of Emerging Endocrine Disrupting Contaminants (EDCs) in Drinking Water. Molecules, 2022, vol. 27, no. 24, pp. 8835. DOI: 10.3390/molecules27248835
  14. Maertens A., Golden E., Luechtefeld T.H., Hoffmann S., Tsaioun K., Hartung T. Probabilistic risk assessment – the keystone for the future of toxicology. ALTEX, 2022, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 3–29. DOI: 10.14573/altex.2201081
  15. Patlewicz G., Wambaugh J.F., Felter S.P., Simon T.W., Becker R.A. Utilizing Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) with High Throughput Exposure Predictions (HTE) as a Risk-Based Prioritization Approach for thousands of chemicals. Comput. Toxicol., 2018, vol. 7, pp. 58–67. DOI: 10.1016/j.comtox.2018.07.002
  16. Kroes R., Kleiner J., Renwick A. The threshold of toxicological concern concept in risk assessment. Toxicol. Sci., 2005, vol. 86, no. 2, pp. 226–230. DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfi169
  17. Munro I.C. Safety assessment procedures for indirect food additives: an overview. Report of a workshop. Regul. Tox-icol. Pharmacol., 1990, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 2–12. DOI: 10.1016/s0273-2300(05)80042-x
  18. Munro I.C., Ford R.A., Kennepohl E., Sprenger J.G. Correlation of structural class with no-observed-effect levels: a proposal for establishing a threshold of concern. Food Chem. Toxicol., 1996, vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 829–867. DOI: 10.1016/s0278-6915(96)00049-x
  19. Hartung T. Thresholds of Toxicological Concern – Setting a threshold for testing below which there is little concern. ALTEX, 2017, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 331–351. DOI: 10.14573/altex.1707011
  20. Kroes R., Renwick A.G., Cheeseman M., Kleiner J., Mangelsdorf I., Piersma A., Schilter B., Schlatter J. [et al.]. Structure-based thresholds of toxicological concern (TTC): guidance for application to substances present at low levels in the diet. Food Chem. Toxicol., 2004, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 65–83. DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2003.08.006
  21. US EPA Strategic Plan to Promote the Development and Implementation of Alternative Test Methods. Regulations.gov. Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-... (March 03, 2023).
  22. Reviewing New Chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Statistics for the New Chemicals Review Program under TSCA. US EPA. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-contr... (March 05, 2023).
  23. Cramer G.M., Ford R.A., Hall R.L. Estimation of toxic hazard – a decision tree approach. Food Cosmet. Toxicol., 1978, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 255–276. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-6264(76)80522-6
  24. Nelms M.D., Patlewicz G. Derivation of New Threshold of Toxicological Concern Values for Exposure via Inhalation for Environmentally-Relevant Chemicals. Front. Toxicol., 2020, vol. 2, pp. 580347. DOI: 10.3389/ftox.2020.580347
  25. Munro I.C., Renwick A.G., Danielewska-Nikiel B. The Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) in risk assessment. Toxicol. Lett., 2008, vol. 180, no. 2, pp. 151–156. DOI: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2008.05.006
  26. EFSA Scientific Committee. Scientific Opinion on Exploring options for providing advice about possible human health risks based on the concept of Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC). EFSA Journal, 2012, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 2750. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2750
  27. Snodin D.J., McCrossen S.D. Mutagenic impurities in pharmaceuticals: a critique of the derivation of the cancer TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) and recommendations for structural-class-based limits. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 2013, vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 299–316. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2013.08.014
  28. Patel A., Joshi K., Rose J., Laufersweiler M., Felter S.P., Api A.M. Bolstering the existing database supporting the non-cancer Threshold of Toxicological Concern values with toxicity data on fragrance-related materials. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 2020, vol. 116, pp. 104718. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104718
  29. European Food Safety Authority and World Health Organization. Review of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) approach and development of new TTC decision tree. EFSA Supporting Publications, 2016, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1006E. DOI: 10.2903/sp.efsa.2016.EN-1006
  30. Patlewicz G., Jeliazkova N., Safford R.J., Worth A.P., Aleksiev B. An evaluation of the implementation of the Cramer classification scheme in the Toxtree software. SAR QSAR Environ. Res., 2008, vol. 19, no. 5–6, pp. 495–524. DOI: 10.1080/10629360802083871
  31. Bhatia S., Schultz T., Roberts D., Shen J., Kromidas L., Api A.M. Comparison of Cramer classification between Tox-tree, the OECD QSAR Toolbox and expert judgment. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 2015, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 52–62. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.11.005
  32. Nelms M.D., Pradeep P., Patlewicz G. Evaluating potential refinements to existing Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) values for environmentally-relevant compounds. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 2019, vol. 109, pp. 104505. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2019.104505
  33. Lapenna S., Worth A. Analysis of the Cramer classification scheme for oral systemic toxicity – implications for its implementation in Toxtree. JRC Scientific and Technical Report. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union, 2011, 39 p. DOI: 10.2788/39716
  34. Risk profile – Proposal P1034. Chemical Migration from Packaging into Food. EFSA, WHO, 2016. Available at: http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/code/proposals/Documents/P1034%20Packagi... (March 17, 2023).
  35. Middleton A.M., Reynolds J., Cable S., Baltazar M.T., Li H., Bevan S., Carmichael P.L., Dent M.P. [et al.]. Are Non-animal Systemic Safety Assessments Protective? A Toolbox and Workflow. Toxicol. Sci., 2022, vol. 189, no. 1, pp. 124–147. DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfac068
  36. Blackburn K., Stickney J.A., Carlson-Lynch H.L., McGinnis P.M., Chappell L., Felter S.P. Application of the threshold of toxicological concern approach to ingredients in personal and household care products. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 2005, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 249–259. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2005.08.007
  37. Yang C., Barlow S.M., Muldoon Jacobs K.L., Vitcheva V., Boobis A.R., Felter S.P., Arvidson K.B., Keller D. [et al.]. Thresholds of Toxicological Concern for cosmetics-related substances: New database, thresholds, and enrichment of chemical space. Food Chem. Toxicol., 2017, vol. 109, pt 1, pp. 170–193. DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2017.08.043
  38. Kroes R., Renwick A.G., Feron V., Galli C.L., Gibney M., Greim H., Guy R.H., Lhuguenot J.C., van de Sandt J.J. Application of the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) to the safety evaluation of cosmetic ingredients. Food Chem. Toxicol., 2007, vol. 45, no. 12, pp. 2533–2562. DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2007.06.021
  39. Terry C., Rasoulpour R.J., Knowles S., Billington R. Utilizing relative potency factors (RPF) and threshold of toxico-logical concern (TTC) concepts to assess hazard and human risk assessment profiles of environmental metabolites: a case study. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 2015, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 301–317. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.12.010
  40. Autrup H., Calow P., Dekant W., Greim H., Wojciech H., Janssen C., Jansson B., Komulainen H. [et al.]. SCCP/SCHER/SCENIHR preliminary report on: the Use of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) Approach for the Safety Assessment of Chemical Substances. Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks, 2008.
  41. Ellison C.A., Blackburn K.L., Carmichael P.L., Clewell H.J. 3rd, Cronin M.T.D., Desprez B., Escher S.E., Ferguson S.S. [et al.]. Challenges in working towards an internal threshold of toxicological concern (iTTC) for use in the safety assessment of cosmetics: Discussions from the Cosmetics Europe iTTC Working Group workshop. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 2019, vol. 103, pp. 63–72. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2019.01.016
  42. Plugge H., Das N., Kostal J. Toward a Universal Acute Fish Threshold of Toxicological Concern. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 2021, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1740–1749. DOI: 10.1002/etc.4991
  43. Rizzi C., Villa S., Cuzzeri A.S., Finizio A. Use of the Species Sensitivity Distribution Approach to Derive Ecological Threshold of Toxicological Concern (eco-TTC) for Pesticides. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 2021, vol. 18, no. 22, pp. 12078. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182212078
  44. Baderna D., Faoro R., Selvestrel G., Troise A., Luciani D., Andres S., Benfenati E. Defining the Human-Biota Thresholds of Toxicological Concern for Organic Chemicals in Freshwater: The Proposed Strategy of the LIFE VERMEER Project Using VEGA Tools. Molecules, 2021, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1928. DOI: 10.3390/molecules26071928
  45. Mons M.N., Heringa M.B., van Genderen J., Puijker L.M., Brand W., van Leeuwen C.J., Stoks P., van der Hoek J.P., van der Kooij D. Use of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) approach for deriving target values for drinking water contaminants. Water Res., 2013, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 1666–1678. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2012.12.025
  46. Melching-Kollmuss S., Dekant W., Kalberlah F. Application of the "threshold of toxicological concern" to derive tol-erable concentrations of "non-relevant metabolites" formed from plant protection products in ground and drinking water. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 2010, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 126–134. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2009.09.011
  47. Baken K.A., Sjerps R.M.A., Schriks M., van Wezel A.P. Toxicological risk assessment and prioritization of drinking water relevant contaminants of emerging concern. Environ. Int., 2018, vol. 118, pp. 293–303. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.05.006
  48. Alekseeva A.V., Savostikova O.N. Problems of the safe use of modern cement materials in the practice of drinking water supply. Gigiena i sanitariya, 2022, vol. 101, no. 12, pp. 1458–1463. DOI: 10.47470/0016-9900-2022-101-12-1458-1463 (in Russian).
  49. Alekseeva A.V., Savostikova O.N. Hygienic assessment of the possibility of using polyurethane coatings in the practice of drinking water supply. Gigiena i sanitariya, 2022, vol. 101, no. 5, pp. 487–492. DOI: 10.47470/0016-9900-2022-101-5-487-492 (in Russian).
Received: 
31.05.2023
Approved: 
19.09.2023
Accepted for publication: 
25.09.2023

You are here

Home