Urinary excretion of chromium following ingestion of chromite-ore processing residues in humans: implications for biomonitoring

Epigenetic Regulation in Chromium-, Nickel- and Cadmium-Induced Carcinogenesis

Environmental and occupational exposure to heavy metals, such as hexavalent chromium, nickel, and cadmium, are major health concerns worldwide. Some heavy metals are well-documented human carcinogens. Multiple mechanisms, including DNA damage, dysregulated gene expression, and aberrant cancer-related signaling, have been shown to contribute to metal-induced carcinogenesis. However, the molecular mechanisms accounting for heavy metal-induced carcinogenesis and angiogenesis are still not fully understood. In recent years, an increasing number of studies have indicated that in addition to genotoxicity and genetic mutations, epigenetic mechanisms play critical roles in metal-induced cancers. Epigenetics refers to the reversible modification of genomes without changing DNA sequences; epigenetic modifications generally involve DNA methylation, histone modification, chromatin remodeling, and non-coding RNAs. Epigenetic regulation is essential for maintaining normal gene expression patterns; the disruption of epigenetic modifications may lead to altered cellular function and even malignant transformation. Therefore, aberrant epigenetic modifications are widely involved in metal-induced cancer formation, development, and angiogenesis. Notably, the role of epigenetic mechanisms in heavy metal-induced carcinogenesis and angiogenesis remains largely unknown, and further studies are urgently required. In this review, we highlight the current advances in understanding the roles of epigenetic mechanisms in heavy metal-induced carcinogenesis, cancer progression, and angiogenesis.

Human health risk and exposure assessment of chromium (VI) in tap water

Hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] has been detected in groundwater across the United States due to industrial and military operations, including plating, painting, cooling-tower water, and chromate production. Because inhalation of Cr(VI) can cause lung cancer in some persons exposed to a sufficient airborne concentration, questions have been raised about the possible hazards associated with exposure to Cr(VI) in tap water via ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact. Although ingested Cr(VI) is generally known to be converted to Cr(III) in the stomach following ingestion, prior to the mid-1980s a quantitative analysis of the reduction capacity of the human stomach had not been conducted. Thus, risk assessments of the human health hazard posed by contaminated drinking water contained some degree of uncertainty. This article presents the results of nine studies, including seven dose reconstruction or simulation studies involving human volunteers, that quantitatively characterize the absorbed dose of Cr(VI) following contact with tap water via all routes of exposure. The methodology used here illustrates an approach that permits one to understand, within a very narrow range, the possible intake of Cr(VI) and the associated health risks for situations where little is known about historical concentrations of Cr(VI). Using red blood cell uptake and sequestration of chromium as an in vivo metric of Cr(VI) absorption, the primary conclusions of these studies were that: (1) oral exposure to concentrations of Cr(VI) in water up to 10 mg/L (ppm) does not overwhelm the reductive capacity of the stomach and blood, (2) the inhaled dose of Cr(VI) associated with showering at concentrations up to 10 mg/L is so small as to pose a de minimis cancer hazard, and (3) dermal exposures to Cr(VI) in water at concentrations as high as 22 mg/L do not overwhelm the reductive capacity of the skin or blood. Because Cr(VI) in water appears yellow at approximately 1-2 mg/L, the studies represent conditions beyond the worst-case scenario for voluntary human exposure. Based on a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for chromium derived from published studies, coupled with the dose reconstruction studies presented in this article, the available information clearly indicates that (1) Cr(VI) ingested in tap water at concentrations below 2 mg/L is rapidly reduced to Cr(III), and (2) even trace amounts of Cr(VI) are not systemically circulated. This assessment indicates that exposure to Cr(VI) in tap water via all plausible routes of exposure, at concentrations well in excess of the current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maximum contaminant level of 100 microg/L (ppb), and perhaps those as high as several parts per million, should not pose an acute or chronic health hazard to humans. These conclusions are consistent with those recently reached by a panel of experts convened by the State of California.

Influence of soil geochemical and physical properties on the sorption and bioaccessibility of chromium(III)

There are numerous Cr(III)-contaminated sites on Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Energy (DOE) lands that are awaiting possible clean up and closure. Ingestion of contaminated soil by children is the risk driver that generally motivates the likelihood of site remediation. The purpose of this study was to develop a simple statistical model based on common soil properties to estimate the hioaccessibility of Cr(III)-contaminated soil upon ingestion. Thirty-five uncontaminated soils from seven major soil orders, whose properties were similar to numerous U.S. DoD contaminated sites, were treated with Cr(III) and aged. Statistical analysis revealed that Cr(III) sorption (e.g., adsorption and surface precipitation) by the soils was strongly correlated with the clay content, total inorganic C, pH, and the cation exchange capacity of the soils. Soils with higher quantities of clay, inorganic C (i.e., carbonates), higher pH, and higher cation exchange capacity generally sequestered more Cr(III). The amount of Cr(III) bioaccessible from the treated soils was determined with a physiologically based extraction test (PBET) that was designed to simulate the digestive process of the stomach. The bioaccessibility of Cr(III) varied widely as a function of soil type with most soils limiting bioaccessibility to <45 and <30% after I and 100 d soil-Cr aging, respectively. Statistical analysis showed the bioaccessibility of Cr(III) on soil was again related to the clay and total inorganic carbon (TIC) content of the soil. Bioaccessibility decreased as the soil TIC content increased and as the clay content decreased. The model yielded an equation based on common soil properties that could be used to predict the Cr(III) bioaccessibility in soils with a reasonable level of confidence.

Urinary chromium as a biological marker of environmental exposure: what are the limitations?

Public concern has mounted recently about environmental exposures to chromium in soil, tap water, and ambient air. In response, agencies charged with protecting public health have attempted to study exposure by monitoring urinary chromium levels among potentially exposed populations. While urinary biomonitoring of occupationally exposed workers has been successfully used to assess high-level inhalation exposures in the workplace, evaluating low-level environmental exposures has been problematic. Due to these problems, before an extensive biological monitoring study is conducted of those exposed to low levels of environmental chromium, several issues must be resolved. First, exposures to chromium must occur at the same time as sampling, because the biological half-life of chromium in urine is very short (less than 2 days). Second, reduced bioavailability and bioaccessibility via the oral and dermal routes of exposure limit the capacity of urinary monitoring to measure environmental exposures (e.g., systemic dose is too small to be measured). Third, the dose of chromium must be sufficient such that it may be reliably measured above background levels in urine (range of 0.2 to 2 microg/liter) and above the analytical limit of detection (0.2 microg/liter). Fourth, the inter- and intrapersonal variability in background levels of urinary chromium is known to be significant and influenced by food and beverage intake, smoking, and exercise. Thus, the role of each factor must be carefully understood. Finally, it is imperative to have developed a complete understanding of the clinical significance of elevated urinary chromium levels before a study is performed, because higher than background levels, in and of themselves, are not indicative of a significant health concern. The route of exposure, valence of chromium to which people were exposed, exposure time, and duration must all be understood before the biological data can be implemented. We have conducted a total of nine human exposure studies over the past 3 years in an attempt to understand the kinetics of chromium and the impact on urinary, red blood cell (RBC), and plasma biomonitoring programs. The results of these studies are described here and our recommendations are offered for how to design and implement a urinary chromium biomonitoring study. In our view, given some evidence that the dose of hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] is sufficient to be measurable above background concentrations of total chromium [Cr(III) and Cr(VI)], duplicated measurements of chromium in plasma and RBCs are, in most cases, a more definitive gauge of environmental exposure than urinary biomonitoring.