Meeting report
The role of biomarkers in chemicals management

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2011.02.001Get rights and content

Introduction

The sensitivity of biomarker determinations has increased tremendously. Micro-separation and micro-extraction techniques have been introduced in the analysis of some biomarkers, increasing selectivity and sensitivity. In addition to a targeted (bottom-up) analysis of protein adducts for specific pre-selected chemicals, (top-down) strategies have been applied (e.g., more proteomics-based characterizations of multiple xenobiotic binding products to one specific nucleophilic target in a relevant, abundant protein). Over the past three years, 47 new or improved biomarkers have been introduced, of which 36 were biomarkers of exposure, eight were biomarkers of susceptibility and three were biomarkers attempting to link physiological responses to adverse health effects (biomarkers of effect) (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3).

During this meeting, it was suggested that future interest will shift from biomarkers of exposure to biomarkers of susceptibility and biomarkers of effects. It was maintained that biomonitoring has made a significant contribution to raising awareness of potential health hazard following uptake of xenobiotic substances from the environment. Communication about the interpretation of outcomes of biomonitoring with the general public will remain a challenge for the future, in particular interpretation of the variability of biomarkers in populations. This issue and the ethical aspects of carrying out biomonitoring studies in worker populations and the general population will be addressed during the next meeting.

The 8th International Symposium on Biological Monitoring in Occupational and Environmental Health (ISBM), held 6–8 September 2010 in the Hanasaari Cultural Centre, had returned to Espoo, Finland, where the 3rd meeting had been held in 1996. Previous meetings were in Kyoto (1992), Parma (1994), Seoul (1998), Banff (2001), Heidelberg (2004) and Beijing (2007). Reports of the Banff, Heidelberg and Beijing meetings have been published already [1], [2], [3]. As in 1996, the meeting was hosted by the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (FIOH). All previous ISBM meetings were organized by the Scientific Committee on Occupational Toxicology (SCOT) of the International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH). The 2010 meeting was also prepared by SCOT, in collaboration with the ICOH Scientific Committee on Toxicology of Metals SCTM), the ICOH Scientific Committee on Rural Health (SCRH) and the Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité (INRS).

The mission of SCOT is to promote research in all areas of occupational toxicology. A current focus of SCOT is the use of biomonitoring in exposure, effect and susceptibility assessment of chemicals in workplaces and the general environment based on sound scientific and ethical principles. Recently, SCOT published “a position paper” to describe the state of the art of biological monitoring in occupational risk assessment [4]. This manuscript was first presented and discussed during the Beijing meeting in 2007 and will be the basis for an ICOH consensus document on biological monitoring.

The Espoo conference was attended by 197 participants with 71 oral presentations and 74 posters. A workshop on Biomonitoring in Occupational Health Practice was organized in parallel with the conference. This workshop was provided by the Nordic Institute of Advanced Training in Occupational Health (NIVA) for 28 participants.

Section snippets

Exposome

Christopher P. Wild, Director of IARC, challenged the audience during the opening address with a suggestion that exposure assessment is an underdeveloped field in molecular cancer epidemiology, at least in comparison with recent advances in genetics. This imbalance limits the ability to elucidate the environmental or lifestyle and genetic causes of chronic diseases, such as cancer. In response to this challenge, Wild defined the “exposome” as the total assessment of all exposure events

New analytical approaches

As an improvement of headspace analysis of volatile organic substances from aqueous solutions, Bernd Rossbach of the University of Mainz, Germany, used solid-phase dynamic extraction (SPDE) to enrich n-heptane and its metabolites (heptane-2-one, heptane-3-one, heptane-4-one, 1-heptanol, 2-heptanol, 3-heptanol and 4-heptanol) from the headspace of blood samples. In this new method, the solid sorbent used is coated on the inner wall of a stainless-steel needle connected to a syringe. By repeated

Biomarkers linking physiological responses to adverse effects

Carina Ladeira of Escola Superior de Tecnologia de Saúde de Lisboa, Portugal, studied the frequency of micronuclei (MN) and its relationship to formaldehyde exposure in Portuguese formaldehyde and formaldehyde resin-based production workers, pathology and anatomy laboratory workers, and non-exposed health-care workers. MN were determined in peripheral blood lymphocytes (MNL) and epithelial cells, isolated from buccal mucosa smears (MNB). Mean MNL values were higher in the laboratory workers

New field of application

An emerging field of application of biomarkers appears to be the use of biomonitoring following chemical incidents. Analyses of biological materials can be very useful in the case of unexpected and, sometimes, high exposures, resulting from chemical spills. Such information could confirm the involvement of specific chemicals for diagnostic purposes and support medical treatment of the survivors of an intoxication. Exposure assessment based on air monitoring is usually not possible because of

Roundtable discussion

At the end of the meeting, some experts discussed with the audience the most important highlights and challenges for biomonitoring in the management of health risks of chemicals (a report has been published on the Internet [10]). Three of the most important highlights in the development of this field were identified, as follows.

  • Over the past 30 years, sophisticated analytical techniques have boosted sensitivity and specificity but some methods have become very complicated. End users of

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the cited contributors for their consent to publish this report and for suggestions made to improve its quality. The author would also like to express his gratitude to Paul Aston of AB Biomonitoring for his suggestions to improve the language of the manuscript.

References (10)

  • M. Manno et al.

    Toxicol. Lett.

    (2010)
  • P.T.J. Scheepers

    Trends Anal. Chem.

    (2005)
  • P.T.J. Scheepers et al.

    Trends Anal. Chem.

    (2002)
  • P.T.J. Scheepers et al.

    Biomarkers

    (2005)
  • P.T.J. Scheepers et al.

    Biomarkers

    (2008)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (5)

View full text