Assessing cancer hazards of bitumen emissions - a case study for complex petroleum substances

Abstract

When assessing cancer hazard and risk associated with a complex petroleum substance, like bitumen emissions, there are often conflicting results related to human, animal and mechanistic studies. Validation of the complex composition to assure that it matches real-world exposures and control of confounders are pivotal factors in study design to allow the necessary read-across during assessments. Several key studies on bitumen emissions in two-year dermal cancer assays reported variable outcomes ranging from high cancer incidence to no cancer incidence. Here, we synthesize findings from published studies to explain the differences and discuss critical factors in cancer hazard evaluation for complex petroleum substances. Using these critical factors, we reviewed relevant human genetic toxicity, mammalian toxicity and mechanistic studies with bitumen to understand the divergence in results. We assess the most reliable and scientifically supported information on the potential carcinogenic hazards of bitumen emissions and comment on quality and completeness of data. Human hazard data are typically considered highest priority because they eliminate the need for interspecies extrapolation and reduce the range of high -to low-dose extrapolation during the risk assessment process. Finally, two well-conducted comprehensive animal studies are discussed that have well-defined test material, exposure concentration and composition representative of worker exposure, evidence of systemic uptake, no confounding exposures and provide consistency across all elements within both studies. Studies that allow effective read-across from human, animal and mechanistic components, control for confounders and are well-validated analytically against workplace exposures, provide the strongest evidence base for evaluating cancer hazard.

Keywords: Asphalt; dermal; fumes; genetic toxicity; human; inhalation; mammalian; mechanistic; mutagenicity; read-across; risk assessment.