4.7 Article

Sustained Human Background Exposure to Acrolein Evidenced by Monitoring Urinary Exposure Biomarkers

Journal

MOLECULAR NUTRITION & FOOD RESEARCH
Volume 63, Issue 24, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.201900849

Keywords

acrolein; biomarkers of exposure; mercapturic acids; N-acetyl-S-(3-hydroxypropyl)-l-cysteine (HPMA); N-acetyl-S-(carboxyethyl)-l-cysteine (CEMA)

Funding

  1. Institute for Scientific Information on Coffee (ISIC), La Tour de Peilz, Switzerland
  2. Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany [685 61]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Scope This study investigates a potential correlation between the intake of heat-processed food and the excretion of the acrolein (AC) biomarkers N-acetyl-S-(3-hydroxypropyl)-l-cysteine (HPMA) and N-acetyl-S-(carboxyethyl)-l-cysteine (CEMA) based on two human studies. Methods and Results Human exposure to AC is monitored using the AC-related mercapturic acids HPMA and CEMA in the urine of a) non-smoking volunteers under defined living conditions and b) of non-smoking volunteers on unrestricted or vegan diet under free living conditions. Free living volunteers in part show markedly enhanced urinary excretions of HPMA and CEMA. The intake of heat-processed food does not influence AC-related biomarker excretion. Incidentally enhanced urinary exposure biomarker levels appear to suggest AC exposure possibly from open fire, barbecuing, or tobacco smoke. However, kinetics of urinary biomarkers related to tobacco and other potential smoke exposure, do not correlate with those observed for HPMA and CEMA. Conclusion This study is the first to convincingly show a sustained and substantial background exposure to AC in non-smoking humans, clearly independent from uptake of heat-processed foods. The data strongly point to endogenous AC generation by pathways of mammalian and/or microbial metabolism as yet not taken into consideration.

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