4.4 Article

The 2022 world health organization reevaluation of human and mammalian toxic equivalency factors for polychlorinated dioxins, dibenzofurans and biphenyls

Journal

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 146, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2023.105525

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In October 2022, the World Health Organization reevaluated the toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for chlorinated dioxin-like compounds in a panel convened in Lisbon. This effort utilized an updated database, Bayesian dose response modeling, and meta-analysis to derive Best-Estimate TEFs. Applying these new TEFs may result in lower total toxic equivalents for dioxin-like chemicals.
In October 2022, the World Health Organization (WHO) convened an expert panel in Lisbon, Portugal in which the 2005 WHO TEFs for chlorinated dioxin-like compounds were reevaluated. In contrast to earlier panels that employed expert judgement and consensus-based assignment of TEF values, the present effort employed an update to the 2006 REP database, a consensus-based weighting scheme, a Bayesian dose response modeling and meta-analysis to derive Best-Estimate TEFs. The updated database contains almost double the number of datasets from the earlier version and includes metadata that informs the weighting scheme. The Bayesian analysis of this dataset results in an unbiased quantitative assessment of the congener-specific potencies with uncertainty estimates. The Best-Estimate TEF derived from the model was used to assign 2022 WHO-TEFs for almost all congeners and these values were not rounded to half-logs as was done previously. The exception was for the mono-ortho PCBs, for which the panel agreed to retain their 2005 WHO-TEFs due to limited and heterogenous data available for these compounds. Applying these new TEFs to a limited set of dioxin-like chemical concentrations measured in human milk and seafood indicates that the total toxic equivalents will tend to be lower than when using the 2005 TEFs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available