Bladder/lung cancer mortality in Blackfoot-disease (BFD)-endemic area villages with low (<150μg/L) well water arsenic levels – An exploration of the dose–response Poisson analysis

Update of the risk assessment of inorganic arsenic in food

The European Commission asked EFSA to update its 2009 risk assessment on arsenic in food carrying out a hazard assessment of inorganic arsenic (iAs) and using the revised exposure assessment issued by EFSA in 2021. Epidemiological studies show that the chronic intake of iAs via diet and/or drinking water is associated with increased risk of several adverse outcomes including cancers of the skin, bladder and lung. The CONTAM Panel used the benchmark dose lower confidence limit based on a benchmark response (BMR) of 5% (relative increase of the background incidence after adjustment for confounders, BMDL05) of 0.06 μg iAs/kg bw per day obtained from a study on skin cancer as a Reference Point (RP). Inorganic As is a genotoxic carcinogen with additional epigenetic effects and the CONTAM Panel applied a margin of exposure (MOE) approach for the risk characterisation. In adults, the MOEs are low (range between 2 and 0.4 for mean consumers and between 0.9 and 0.2 at the 95th percentile exposure, respectively) and as such raise a health concern despite the uncertainties.

Relations between personal exposure to elevated concentrations of arsenic in water and soil and blood arsenic levels amongst people living in rural areas in Limpopo, South Africa

Exposure to arsenic even at low levels can lead to adverse health outcomes, however, there is a paucity of research from South Africa in relation to human exposure to arsenic. We investigated long-term exposure of residents in Limpopo province, South Africa, in a cross-sectional study by analysing water, soil and blood arsenic concentrations from two arsenic-exposed (high and medium-low exposure) villages and one non-exposed (control) village. There were statistically significant differences in the distribution of arsenic in water, soil and blood amongst the three sites. The median drinking water arsenic concentration in the high-exposure village was 1.75 µg/L (range = 0.02 to 81.30 µg/L), 0.45 µg/L (range = 0.100 to 6.00 µg/L) in the medium- / low-exposure village and 0.15 µg/L (range =  < limit of detection (LOD) to 29.30 µg/L) in the control site. The median soil arsenic concentration in the high-exposure village was 23.91 mg/kg (range =  < LOD to 92.10 mg/kg) whilst arsenic concentrations were below the limit of detection in all soil samples collected from the medium-/low-exposure and control villages. In the high-exposure village, the median blood arsenic concentration was 1.6 µg/L (range = 0.7 to 4.2 µg/L); 0.90 µg/L (range =  < LOD to 2.5 µg/L) in the medium-/low-exposure village and 0.6 µg/L (range =  < LOD to 3.3 µg/L) in the control village. Significant percentages of drinking water, soil and blood samples from the exposed sites were above the internationally recommended guidelines (namely, 10 µg/L, 20 mg/kg and 1 µg/L, respectively). Majority of participants (86%) relied on borehole water for drinking and there was a significant positive correlation between arsenic in blood and borehole water (p-value = 0.031). There was also a statistically significant correlation between arsenic concentrations in participants' blood and soil samples collected from gardens (p-value = 0.051). Univariate quantile regression found that blood arsenic concentrations increased by 0.034 µg/L (95% CI = 0.02-0.05) for each one unit increase in water arsenic concentrations (p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, water source and homegrown vegetable consumption in multivariate quantile regression, participants from the high-exposure site had significantly higher blood concentrations than those in the control site (coefficient: 1.00; 95% CI = 0.25-1.74; p-value = 0.009) demonstrating that blood arsenic is a good biomarker of arsenic exposure. Our findings also provide new evidence for South Africa on the association between drinking water and arsenic exposure, emphasising the need for the provision of potable water for human consumption in areas with high environmental arsenic concentrations.

A review of low-dose arsenic risks and human cancers

The linear no-threshold (LNT) model has historically been the default assumption in assessing carcinogenic risk from arsenic ingestion based on epidemiological studies. This contrasts with the threshold model used in assessing carcinogenic risk from arsenic ingestion derived from toxicological investigations of experimental animals. We present here a review of our epidemiological work that has examined models that may better explain the human cancer risk from the ingestion of arsenic, particularly from low level exposures, than does the LNT model. While previous epidemiology studies have demonstrated increased risks of bladder, lung, and skin cancers at arsenic exposures of 200 ug/L or greater, we seek here to examine the dose-response patterns at lower exposure levels. These include ecological, case/control, and cohort designs. Methodologic issues include choice of continuous or stratified analysis of exposure data, search for sources of non-conformity or variability, and distinctions in water sources and geography. Multiple studies have yielded useful data-based models, including threshold models, hockey-stick models, and "J-shaped" linear-quadratic models. These models have found that increased cancer risk may only begin at specific arsenic exposure levels greater than zero. These results provide guidance in seeking toxicological explanations and public health reference levels.

Spatial assessment of heavy metals contamination in household garden soils in rural Limpopo Province, South Africa

Heavy metal pollution in soil poses a serious health threat to humans living in close proximity and in contact with contaminated soil. Exposure to heavy metals can result in a range of adverse health effects, including skin lesions, cardiovascular effects, lowering of IQ scores and cancers. The main objectives of this study were to (1) use a portable XRF spectrophotometer to measure concentrations of lead (Pb), arsenic (As), mercury (Hg) and cadmium (Cd) in residential soils in rural Giyani in the Limpopo province of South Africa; (2) to assess the spatial distribution of soil metal concentrations; and (3) to assess pollution levels in residential soils. There were elevated levels of As at one of the sites where 54% of soil samples exceeded the Canadian reference levels for As of 20 mg/kg. Using the geoaccumulation index (I_geo) to determine contamination levels of As, 57% of soil samples from the most polluted site were found to be moderately to heavily and extremely contaminated with As (I_geo class 2-5). The site is located near the Giyani Greenstone Belt, which is characterized by abandoned mines and artisanal mining activities. Gold ores are closely associated with sulphide minerals such as arsenopyrite, and these have been found to contain high amounts of As. This study highlighted the potential for soil contamination and the importance of site-specific risk assessment in the context of environment and health impact assessments prior to major developments, including human settlement developments.

Health effects inflicted by chronic low-level arsenic contamination in groundwater: A global public health challenge

Groundwater arsenic (As) contamination is a global public health concern. The high level of As exposure (100-1000 μg/L or even higher) through groundwater has been frequently associated with serious public health hazards, e.g., skin disorders, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory problems, complications of gastrointestinal tract, liver and splenic ailments, kidney and bladder disorders, reproductive failure, neurotoxicity and cancer. However, reviews on low-level As exposure and the imperative health effects are far less documented. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has set the permissible standard of As in drinking water at 10 μg/L. Considering the WHO and USEPA guidelines, most of the developed countries have established standards at or below this guideline. Worldwide many countries including India have millions of aquifers with low-level As contamination (≤50 μg/L). The exposed population of these areas might not show any As-related skin lesions (hallmark of As toxicity particularly in a population consuming As contaminated groundwater >300 μg/L) but might be subclinically affected. This review has attempted to encompass the wide range of health effects associated with chronic low-level As exposure ≤50 μg/L and the probable mechanisms that might provide a better insight regarding the underlying cause of these clinical manifestations. Therefore, there is an urgent need to create mass awareness about the health effects of chronic low-level As exposure and planning of proper mitigation strategies.

Arsenic in Drinking Water and Lung Cancer Mortality in the United States: An Analysis Based on US Counties and 30 Years of Observation (1950-1979)

Background. To examine whether the US EPA (2010) lung cancer risk estimate derived from the high arsenic exposures (10–934 µg/L) in southwest Taiwan accurately predicts the US experience from low arsenic exposures (3–59 µg/L). Methods. Analyses have been limited to US counties solely dependent on underground sources for their drinking water supply with median arsenic levels of ≥3 µg/L. Results. Cancer risks (slopes) were found to be indistinguishable from zero for males and females. The addition of arsenic level did not significantly increase the explanatory power of the models. Stratified, or categorical, analysis yielded relative risks that hover about 1.00. The unit risk estimates were nonpositive and not significantly different from zero, and the maximum (95% UCL) unit risk estimates for lung cancer were lower than those in US EPA (2010). Conclusions. These data do not demonstrate an increased risk of lung cancer associated with median drinking water arsenic levels in the range of 3–59 µg/L. The upper-bound estimates of the risks are lower than the risks predicted from the SW Taiwan data and do not support those predictions. These results are consistent with a recent metaregression that indicated no increased lung cancer risk for arsenic exposures below 100–150 µg/L.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Lung Cancer Risk and Inorganic Arsenic in Drinking Water

High levels (> 200 µg/L) of inorganic arsenic in drinking water are known to be a cause of human lung cancer, but the evidence at lower levels is uncertain. We have sought the epidemiological studies that have examined the dose-response relationship between arsenic levels in drinking water and the risk of lung cancer over a range that includes both high and low levels of arsenic. Regression analysis, based on six studies identified from an electronic search, examined the relationship between the log of the relative risk and the log of the arsenic exposure over a range of 1–1000 µg/L. The best-fitting continuous meta-regression model was sought and found to be a no-constant linear-quadratic analysis where both the risk and the exposure had been logarithmically transformed. This yielded both a statistically significant positive coefficient for the quadratic term and a statistically significant negative coefficient for the linear term. Sub-analyses by study design yielded results that were similar for both ecological studies and non-ecological studies. Statistically significant X-intercepts consistently found no increased level of risk at approximately 100–150 µg/L arsenic.

Arsenic and human health effects: A review

Arsenic (As) is ubiquitous in nature and humans being exposed to arsenic via atmospheric air, ground water and food sources are certain. Major sources of arsenic contamination could be either through geological or via anthropogenic activities. In physiological individuals, organ system is described as group of organs that transact collectively and associate with other systems for conventional body functions. Arsenic has been associated with persuading a variety of complications in body organ systems: integumentary, nervous, respiratory, cardiovascular, hematopoietic, immune, endocrine, hepatic, renal, reproductive system and development. In this review, we outline the effects of arsenic on the human body with a main focus on assorted organ systems with respective disease conditions. Additionally, underlying mechanisms of disease development in each organ system due to arsenic have also been explored. Strikingly, arsenic has been able to induce epigenetic changes (in utero) and genetic mutations (a leading cause of cancer) in the body. Occurrence of various arsenic induced health effects involving emerging areas such as epigenetics and cancer along with their respective mechanisms are also briefly discussed.

Arsenic in drinking water and urinary tract cancers: a systematic review of 30 years of epidemiological evidence

BACKGROUND

Arsenic in drinking water is a public health issue affecting hundreds of millions of people worldwide. This review summarizes 30 years of epidemiological studies on arsenic exposure in drinking water and the risk of bladder or kidney cancer, quantifying these risks using a meta-analytical framework.

METHODS

Forty studies met the selection criteria. Seventeen provided point estimates of arsenic concentrations in drinking water and were used in a meta-analysis of bladder cancer incidence (7 studies) and mortality (10 studies) and kidney cancer mortality (2 studies). Risk estimates for incidence and mortality were analyzed separately using Generalized Linear Models. Predicted risks for bladder cancer incidence were estimated at 10, 50 and 150 μg/L arsenic in drinking water. Bootstrap randomizations were used to assess robustness of effect size.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies observed an association between arsenic in drinking water and bladder cancer. Ten studies showed an association with kidney cancer, although of lower magnitude than that for bladder cancer. The meta-analyses showed the predicted risks for bladder cancer incidence were 2.7 [1.2-4.1]; 4.2 [2.1-6.3] and; 5.8 [2.9-8.7] for drinking water arsenic levels of 10, 50, and 150 μg/L, respectively. Bootstrapped randomizations confirmed this increased risk, but, lowering the effect size to 1.4 [0.35-4.0], 2.3 [0.59-6.4], and 3.1 [0.80-8.9]. The latter suggests that with exposures to 50 μg/L, there was an 83% probability for elevated incidence of bladder cancer; and a 74% probability for elevated mortality. For both bladder and kidney cancers, mortality rates at 150 ug/L were about 30% greater than those at 10 μg/L.

CONCLUSION

Arsenic in drinking water is associated with an increased risk of bladder and kidney cancers, although at lower levels (<150 μg/L), there is uncertainty due to the increased likelihood of exposure misclassification at the lower end of the exposure curve. Meta-analyses suggest exposure to 10 μg/L of arsenic in drinking water may double the risk of bladder cancer, or at the very least, increase it by about 40%. With the large number of people exposed to these arsenic concentrations worldwide the public health consequences of arsenic in drinking water are substantial.

Genotoxic and epigenetic mechanisms in arsenic carcinogenicity

Arsenic is a human carcinogen with weak mutagenic properties that induces tumors through mechanisms not yet completely understood. People worldwide are exposed to arsenic-contaminated drinking water, and epidemiological studies showed a high percentage of lung, bladder, liver, and kidney cancer in these populations. Several mechanisms by which arsenical compounds induce tumorigenesis were proposed including genotoxic damage and chromosomal abnormalities. Over the past decade, a growing body of evidence indicated that epigenetic modifications have a role in arsenic-inducing adverse effects on human health. The main epigenetic mechanisms are DNA methylation in gene promoter regions that regulate gene expression, histone tail modifications that regulate the accessibility of transcriptional machinery to genes, and microRNA activity (noncoding RNA able to modulate mRNA translation). The "double capacity" of arsenic to induce mutations and epimutations could be the main cause of arsenic-induced carcinogenesis. The aim of this review is to better clarify the mechanisms of the initiation and/or the promotion of arsenic-induced carcinogenesis in order to understand the best way to perform an early diagnosis and a prompt prevention that is the key point for protecting arsenic-exposed population. Studies on arsenic-exposed population should be designed in order to examine more comprehensively the presence and consequences of these genetic/epigenetic alterations.

Arsenic exposure and bladder cancer: quantitative assessment of studies in human populations to detect risks at low doses

While exposures to high levels of arsenic in drinking water are associated with excess cancer risk (e.g., skin, bladder, and lung), exposures at lower levels (e.g., <100-200 µg/L) generally are not. Lack of significant associations may result from methodological issues (e.g., inadequate statistical power, exposure misclassification), or a different dose-response relationship at low exposures, possibly associated with a toxicological mode of action that requires a sufficient dose for increased tumor formation. The extent to which bladder cancer risk for low-level arsenic exposure can be statistically measured by epidemiological studies was examined using an updated meta-analysis of bladder cancer risk with data from two new publications. The summary relative risk estimate (SRRE) for all nine studies was elevated slightly, but not significantly (1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.21, p-Heterogeneity [p-H]=0.543). The SRRE among never smokers was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.66-1.08, p-H=0.915), whereas the SRRE was positive and more heterogeneous among ever smokers (1.18; 95% CI: 0.97-1.44, p-H=0.034). The SRRE was statistically significantly lower than relative risks predicted for never smokers in the United States based on linear extrapolation of risks from higher doses in southwest Taiwan to arsenic water exposures >10 µg/L for more than one-third of a lifetime. By contrast, for all study subjects, relative risks predicted for one-half of lifetime exposure to 50 µg/L were just above the upper 95% CI on the SRRE. Thus, results from low-exposure studies, particularly for never smokers, were statistically inconsistent with predicted risk based on high-dose extrapolation. Additional studies that better characterize tobacco use and stratify analyses of arsenic and bladder cancer by smoking status are necessary to further examine risks of arsenic exposure for smokers.