暴露變異對生物偵測指標測定結果的影響探討

Exploration of Influence of Exposure Variability on the Measurements of Biological Monitoring

張豊杰(Li-Jie Chang)

指導教授 ： 陳友剛

長榮大學/健康科學學院/職業安全與衛生研究所/碩士(2008年)

https://doi.org/10.6833/CJCU.2008.00153

摘要

使用短代謝半衰期的生物偵測指標物作為有害物暴露測定時，檢體採集時段前是否有高濃度的暴露，可能對生物偵測指標物測定結果產生影響。但有關短時間高濃度暴露或暴露濃度變異程度，對生物暴露指標物測定結果的影響則缺乏研究。本研究針對一位DMF暴露勞工進行20個連續工作天的暴露測定，其中空氣DMF暴露以直讀式Figaro氣體偵測器，搭配 HOBO Data Logger 進行連續監測；尿液和唾液生物偵測檢體在每天進行多次收集，並針對DMF本體和其生物暴露指標物 NMF 在檢體中含量，分別以不同型式的氣相層析儀進行測定。研究中評估空氣暴露和生物偵測指標物的關聯性，並探討尖峰暴露或暴露濃度變異對生物偵測指標物測定結果的影響；空氣暴露濃度測定值代入一個一階暴露模式中，推估唾液中DMF濃度或尿液中NMF濃度，推估與實際測定值被比較。結果顯示：(1)以空氣暴露濃度超過恕限值一倍、二倍或三倍的尖峰暴露發生百分比，皆無法顯著反應生物偵測指標物的濃度；(2)當空氣暴露變異大時，難以利用空氣暴露平均濃度值估計暴露後尿液NMF濃度；(3)超過恕限值的尖峰暴露發生百分比增加且空氣暴露濃度GSD大時，尿液NMF濃度大於或等於 7.5 mg/L (1/2 BEI) 的機會增加，顯示尖峰暴露與暴露變異二項因子對於生物偵測指標物的含量具有相當重要的影響。本研究確認對於使用短半衰期生物偵測指標物測定執行有害物暴露評估，需注意評估尖峰暴露和暴露變異。如何在暴露評估過程中，收集這二項因子的資料，作為生物偵測指標物測定的參考資訊，為未來重要的研究課題。

關鍵字

暴露評估 ； 暴露變異 ； 空氣暴露 ； 連續監測 ； 生物偵測

並列摘要

When a short half-life biomarker is used as the surrogate of exposure to a hazardous agent, the measured values of the biomarker can be influenced by the events of high concentration exposure occurring near the collection time of specimens. However, there is a lack of studies on the influence of short-term high concentration exposure and magnitude of exposure variability on the quantification of biomarkers. In this study, a worker with DMF exposure was recruited for exposure measurements on 20 consecutive workdays. Airborne DMF exposure was continuously monitored by a direct-reading instrument, Figaro sensor with a HOBO data logger. Urine and saliva samples of the worker were collected multiple times in each workday. DMF and its metabolite, NMF, in the samples were quantified by using different types of gas chromatography. The association between exposure measurements of airborne DMF and masses of the biomarkers of DMF was evaluated. The influence of peak exposure and magnitude of exposure variability on the quantification of biomarkers was explored. The measurements of airborne DMF exposure were input into a first-order exposure model to estimate the concentrations of DMF in the salivary samples and of NMF in the urine samples. A comparison was made between the estimates and the actual measured values. The results showed that: (1) The occurrence percentage of airborne DMF exposure exceeding one, two or three times of TLV could not significantly reflect the concentrations of biomarkers; (2) When the variability of airborne DMF exposure became large, the average of airborne DMF exposure could not estimate the concentration of NMF in urine well; (3) the increase of the occurrence percentage of peak exposure exceeding the TLV and the larger of the geometric standard deviation of airborne DMF exposure, the higher of the probability of urinary NMF concentration equal or greater than 7.5 mg/L (1/2 BEI). This indicated that peak exposure and exposure variability were two crucial factors in determining the amount of biomarkers in the specimens. The results of this study confirmed that these two factors should be characterized when the measurements of biomarkers with short half-lives were used to conduct exposure assessment for hazardous agents. How to collect the information of peak exposure and exposure variability as reference data in the process of exposure assessment is an important research topic for future studies of biomarkers.

並列關鍵字

exposure assessment ； exposure variability ； continuous monitoring ； biological monitoring

參考文獻

林育群, 建立唾液中二甲基甲醯胺職業暴露之生物指標分析方法, 成功大學環境醫學研究所碩士論文, 2003.

物質安全資料表-二甲基甲醯胺, 行政院勞工委員會勞工安全衛生研究所, 2000.

Angerer J., Goen T., Kramer A. and Kafferlein H.U.: N-methylcarbamoyl Adducts at The N-terminal Valine of Globin in Workers Exposed to N,N-dimethylformamide. Arch Toxicol, 1998, 72, 309-313.

Calvert G.M., Fajen J.M., Hills B.W. and Halperin W.E.: Testicular Cancer, Dimethylformamide, and Leather Tanneries. Lancet, 1990, 336, 1253-4.

Chang H.Y., Shih T.S., Guo Y.L., Tsai C.Y. and Hsu P.C.: Sperm Function in Workers Exposed to N,N-dimethylformamide in The Synthetic Leather Industry. Fertility and Sterility, 2004b, 81(6), 1589-1594.