The naphthalene state of the science symposium: Objectives, organization, structure, and charge

A critical review of naphthalene sources and exposures relevant to indoor and outdoor air

Both the recent classification of naphthalene as a possible human carcinogen and its ubiquitous presence motivate this critical review of naphthalene's sources and exposures. We evaluate the environmental literature on naphthalene published since 1990, drawing on nearly 150 studies that report emissions and concentrations in indoor, outdoor and personal air. While naphthalene is both a volatile organic compound and a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon, concentrations and exposures are poorly characterized relative to many other pollutants. Most airborne emissions result from combustion, and key sources include industry, open burning, tailpipe emissions, and cigarettes. The second largest source is off-gassing, specifically from naphthalene's use as a deodorizer, repellent and fumigant. In the U.S., naphthalene's use as a moth repellant has been reduced in favor of para-dichlorobenzene, but extensive use continues in mothballs, which appears responsible for some of the highest indoor exposures, along with off-label uses. Among the studies judged to be representative, average concentrations ranged from 0.18 to 1.7 microg m(-3) in non-smoker's homes, and from 0.02 to 0.31 microg m(-3) outdoors in urban areas. Personal exposures have been reported in only three European studies. Indoor sources are the major contributor to (non-occupational) exposure. While its central tendencies fall well below guideline levels relevant to acute health impacts, several studies have reported maximum concentrations exceeding 100 microg m(-3), far above guideline levels. Using current but draft estimates of cancer risks, naphthalene is a major environmental risk driver, with typical individual risk levels in the 10(-4) range, which is high and notable given that millions of individuals are exposed. Several factors influence indoor and outdoor concentrations, but the literature is inconsistent on their effects. Further investigation is needed to better characterize naphthalene's sources and exposures, especially for indoor and personal measurements.

Screening-level population risk assessment of nasal tumors in the US due to naphthalene exposure

Several naphthalene Unit Risk Factors (URFs) were proposed by the US Environmental Protection Agency in 2004 using data on the development of olfactory epithelial neuroblastomas and nasal respiratory epithelial adenomas in rats, but these URFs may be inappropriate and unnecessarily conservative for estimating human cancer risks. The purpose of the present exercise was to perform a screening-level population risk assessment of the US population to compare the observed number of naphthalene-induced nasal tumors in the US to the number that would be predicted if the URFs for naphthalene were as proposed. Nine scenarios were evaluated to represent the range of exposures individuals have typically experienced. Results indicate that the total predicted burden of naphthalene-induced nasal tumors per year in the US (65,905 rare nasal tumors, of which 29,121 are olfactory epithelial neuroblastomas) is much greater than the number of these tumors actually observed per year (910 total nasal tumors, of which 66 are olfactory neuroblastomas) over the period 1973-2006. This suggests that using rat nasal tumor data to derive a naphthalene URF for humans should be re-evaluated.

Available data on naphthalene exposures: strengths and limitations

Exposures to naphthalene occur from a number of sources. Data on these exposures have been reported by a number of researchers; however, these data have not been organized into a consistent framework. In addition, while naphthalene has been identified as an animal inhalation carcinogen there has been no attempt to define the ranges of long-term average inhalation exposures for the general population or sub populations that are relevant to the assessment of the risk of the occurrence of chronic effects. This paper attempts to organize the available data on naphthalene levels in air and provide ranges for the long-term average concentrations experienced by different populations. The paper also discusses the limitations of available data and identifies areas for future research.

Naphthalene metabolism in relation to target tissue anatomy, physiology, cytotoxicity and tumorigenic mechanism of action

This report provides a summary of deliberations conducted under the charge for members of Module C Panel participating in the Naphthalene State-of-the-Science Symposium (NS(3)), Monterey, CA, October 9-12, 2006. The panel was charged with reviewing the current state of knowledge and uncertainty about naphthalene metabolism in relation to anatomy, physiology and cytotoxicity in tissues observed to have elevated tumor incidence in these rodent bioassays. Major conclusions reached concerning scientific claims of high confidence were that: (1) rat nasal tumor occurrence was greatly enhanced, if not enabled, by adjacent, histologically related focal cellular proliferation; (2) elevated incidence of mouse lung tumors occurred at a concentration (30 ppm) cytotoxic to the same lung region at which tumors occurred, but not at a lower and less cytotoxic concentration (tumorigenesis NOAEL=10 ppm); (3) naphthalene cytotoxicity requires metabolic activation (unmetabolized naphthalene is not a proximate cause of observed toxicity or tumors); (4) there are clear regional and species differences in naphthalene bioactivation; and (5) target tissue anatomy and physiology is sufficiently well understood for rodents, non-human primates and humans to parameterize species-specific physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models for nasal and lung effects. Critical areas of uncertainty requiring resolution to enable improved human cancer risk assessment were considered to be that: (1) cytotoxic naphthalene metabolites, their modes of cytotoxic action, and detailed low-dose dose-response need to be clarified, including in primate and human tissues, and neonatal tissues; (2) mouse, rat, and monkey inhalation studies are needed to better define in vivo naphthalene uptake and metabolism in the upper respiratory tract; (3) in vivo validation studies are needed for a PBPK model for monkeys exposed to naphthalene by inhalation, coupled to cytotoxicity studies referred to above; and (4) in vivo studies are needed to validate a human PBPK model for naphthalene. To address these uncertainties, the Panel proposed specific research studies that should be feasible to complete relatively promptly. Concerning residual uncertainty far less easy to resolve, the Panel concluded that environmental, non-cytotoxic exposure levels of naphthalene do not induce tumors at rates that can be predicted meaningfully by simple linear extrapolation from those observed in rodents chronically exposed to far greater, cytotoxic naphthalene concentrations.

Exposure, epidemiology and human cancer incidence of naphthalene

This report provides a summary of deliberations conducted under the charge for members of Module B participating in the Naphthalene State-of-the-Science Symposium (NS(3)), Monterey, CA, October 9-12, 2006. The panel's charge was to derive consensus estimates of human exposure to naphthalene under various conditions, cancer incidence plausibly associated with these exposures, and identify quintessential research that could significantly reduce or eliminate material uncertainties to inform human cancer risk assessment. Relying in large part on a commissioned paper [Price, P.S., Jayjock, M.A., 2008. Available data on naphthalene exposures: strengths and limitations, in this issue], exposure levels were estimated for background (0.0001-0.003 microg/m(3)), ambient air (0.001-1.0 microg/m(3)), vehicles (0.003-3.0 microg/m(3)), residences (0.1-10 microg/m(3)), mothball use (on-label: 1-100 microg/m(3); off-label: 10-100 microg/m(3)), and occupational (low: 3-100 microg/m(3); high: 30-1,000 microg/m(3)). There have been few published reports of human cancer associated with naphthalene exposure. Several research projects are suggested that could reduce uncertainty in our understanding of human exposure. Using best scientific judgment, it is reasonably certain that the largest non-occupational exposures to naphthalene are indoor/residential exposures, particularly in households that use naphthalene-based products such as mothballs. However, even the highest of these exposures is likely to fall one or more orders of magnitude below moderate or high-level occupational exposure levels experienced by the few known cohorts exposed occupationally to naphthalene alone or as part of chemical mixtures such as jet fuel.

A review of whole animal bioassays of the carcinogenic potential of naphthalene

This report provides a summary of deliberations conducted under the charge for members of Module A participating in the Naphthalene State-of-the-Science Symposium (NS3), Monterey, CA, October 9-12, 2006. Whole animal bioassays have been performed by the National Toxicology Program in mice and rats to ascertain the carcinogenic potential of naphthalene by inhalation exposure. A statistically significant increased incidence of pulmonary alveolar/bronchiolar adenoma (a benign lesion), was observed among female mice; an observed increase among the males did not reach statistical significance. No nasal tumors were observed in either sex. A tumorigenic response was observed in both sexes of rats, in males an increased incidence of nasal respiratory epithelium adenoma (a benign rather than malignant lesion) and in females, olfactory epithelial neuroblastoma. Interpretations of these studies vary. On the one hand, evidence of extensive non-neoplastic response in both sexes of both species indicates cytotoxicity occurred at all doses, and strongly suggests that cytotoxicity played a significant role in the tumor responses observed in the target tissues. On the other hand, olfactory epithelial neuroblastoma has rarely been observed in NTP bioassays. This review seeks to develop a consensus understanding of the scientific evidence provided by these studies, taking into account that they have been used as the basis for quantitative human cancer risk assessment, and suggests scientific studies that, if performed, could resolve scientific uncertainties.