Reducing uncertainty in the derivation and application of health guidance values in public health practice. Dioxin as a case study.

Abstract

We were requested by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to clarify the relationships among the minimal risk level (MRL), action level, and environmental media evaluation guide (EMEG) for dioxin established by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). In response we developed a document entitled "Dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds in Soil, Part I: ATSDR Interim Policy Guideline"; and a supporting document entitled "Dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds in Soil, Part II: Technical Support Document". In these documents, we evaluated the key assumptions underlying the development and use of the ATSDR action level, MRL, and EMEG for dioxin. We described the chronology of events outlining these different health guidance values for dioxin and identified the areas of uncertainty surrounding these values. Four scientific assumptions were found to have had a great impact on this process; these were: (1) the specific uncertainty factors used, (2) the toxicity equivalent (TEQ) approach, (3) the fractional exposure from different pathways, and (4) the use of body burdens in the absence of exposure data. This information was subsequently used to develop a framework for reducing the uncertainties in public health risk assessment associated with exposure to other chemical contaminants in the environment. Within this framework are a number of future directions for reducing uncertainty, including physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling (PBPK), benchmark dose modeling (BMD), functional toxicology, and the assessment of chemical mixture interactions.