National Academies Press: OpenBook

Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances (1991)

Chapter: 6. Chemical Assay of Specimens

« Previous: 5. Collection, Short-Term Storage, and Archiving of Tissues
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

6
Chemical Assay of Specimens

INTRODUCTION

“Monitoring” implies routine measurement that is inherently closed-ended and based on established methods and practices. Monitoring programs vary with regard to requirements and approaches, but usually have as a base a list of analytes (“target chemicals”) and assay methods that have been validated for the sample type and concentration range of interest. A successful monitoring program maintains results over time for comparison and must therefore be technically adequate at the outset. Comparability is most easily achieved if assay methods are constant. A monitoring program often offers a good setting for other kinds of activities, and the National Human Monitoring Program includes aspects that are not monitoring, such as recognition of new agents of concern and detection of chemicals not previously included in monitoring protocols. The latter objectives are appropriate to a population-based biologic surveillance program, but they require an approach to chemical analysis different from that for monitoring. Design of a program of surveillance requires a plan for development and change in analytic methods, as well as a plan for maintaining stable methods and analytic quality control. Successful balancing of the routine and the innovative or exploratory components of such a program is a major challenge for the program’s management.

The following discussion of aspects of a program is based on several assumptions:

  • Present knowledge does not permit designation of all substances that might be detectable in tissues or that would be important if detected.

  • Present analytic technology is inadequate for surveillance of some sub-

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

stances, because of limitations in sensitivity, in applicability to some chemicals of interest, and in cost.

  • Individual target chemicals will increase or decrease in importance over time, but relatively slowly. The slowness of increases in importance reflects the slowness of increases in US population-wide exposures. Decreases in importance reflect similarly slow decreases in exposures and increases in understanding of the nature of the health implications of and reasons for some exposures. “Emergency” exposure assessments that might be required when a serious health hazard is discovered would be best addressed in focused special studies.

  • Monitoring efforts will provide opportunities for exploration of tissue composition beyond a list of target chemicals. Those opportunities and other efforts parallel to the monitoring tasks should support continuing development of the monitoring program itself.

MAJOR FEATURES OF A PROGRAM FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF TISSUES FOR POPULATION-BASED SURVEILLANCE OF EXPOSURES

Monitoring-Program Development

One must first establish goals, specify target chemicals and quantities, and identify analytic methods. The usual reason for establishing a monitoring program is recognition of a problem or potential problem related to known agents. Programs of environmental monitoring have used several kinds of information in formulating lists of target chemicals, such as case reports of environmental concentrations or industrial releases, volumes of chemicals produced or sold, toxicity or other hazard-ranking factors, and analytic feasibility. A chemical would be a good candidate for inclusion in a tissue monitoring program if it met the following requirements:

  • The chemical is detectable with currently used or available methods.

  • It would appear in the tissue at detectable concentrations in the event of exposure.

  • Its presence in the tissue would indicate an exposure, i.e., would represent a marker of exposure or the actual substance or its metabolite would be present only in response to an exposure.

  • There is reason to believe that exposure is possible or likely.

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

On the basis of those characteristics, several criteria and methods for selecting target chemicals are possible. A recent discussion of priorities for laboratory testing of chemicals (NRC, 1984a) presented many issues that are relevant here. They are now briefly described.

Selection Based on Analytic Expediency and Constraints

In formulating a new monitoring program, one might choose analytic methods to maximize the likelihood of detection of key target chemicals. Multi-agent analytic schemes that rely on gas chromatography and mass spectrometry (GC-MS) are common to many environmental monitoring laboratories. Within any such scheme, the ranges of applicability and sensitivity of detection are roughly fixed; analytical performance then dictates what goals (i.e., what list of target chemicals and detection limits) might be considered. For example, schemes currently used to detect EPA priority pollutants with detection limits of 1–10 ppb in water or wastewater might permit inclusion of additional target chemicals with similar analytic behavior (for example, alkylated polycyclic hydrocarbons in addition to the priority polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), but could not permit inclusion of polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) and dibenzofurans (PCDFs) at concentrations lower than parts per billion. Modification of analytic protocols might permit detection of PCDDs and PCDFs, but exclude detection of polycyclic hydrocarbons altogether.

For monitoring purposes, established assay protocols represent analytic “windows” through which specific subsets of contaminant chemicals might be detected and measured. That is an advantage, because within such a window nontarget chemicals might be detected and new target chemicals added without extensive analytic-method development; but it is a disadvantage because “blind spots” outside established analytic windows might be neglected. The latter concern would be reinforced if analytic expediency were a main criterion for identifying new target chemicals.

Selection Based on Regulatory Interest

To the degree that a monitoring program is aimed at a specific regulatory issue, other criteria for the selection of target chemicals might be preempted. Analytic methods would then have to be devised to meet the requirements of the chemicals targeted by the regulation, and future additions to the list would probably require development of new methods. It is important to determine

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

what regulatory needs are to be served by a monitoring program, but it is equally important to determine whether the program is confined to those particular needs or has (or will have) a broader mission as well.

Selection Based on Prior Detection in Human Tissues

Reports of detection of contaminant chemicals in human tissue in the scientific literature or in regulatory-agency studies constitute convincing evidence that exposures can occur and that tissue concentrations are measurable, by at least some method. Compilations of such reports—as in the Chemicals Identified in Human Media data base (EPA, 1980) and the NIST Human Specimen Banking Reports (Wise and Zeisler, 1984)—not only are tools for locating candidate target chemicals that might conform to pre-existing analytic capabilities, but also might indicate a need for new analytic approaches to widen the range of chemicals detected.

Selection Based on Indications of Health Relevance

Testing programs conducted by NIH or by nongovernment researchers will continue to provide findings that increase or decrease health concerns related to possible exposures to individual agents. In lieu of case reports or other documented findings of agents in tissues to be monitored, results of toxicologic studies in animal models can indicate the likelihood that a candidate target chemical will be present and detectable in sample tissues. When such findings indicate a need for epidemiologic followup, inclusion of the agent in monitoring programs should be considered.

Selection Based on Indications of Environmental Contamination

Numerous environmental monitoring programs focus on drinking water (Wallace et al., 1986), air quality (Hunt et al., 1986; Wallace et al., 1986; EPA, 1987b), food (Reed, 1985; Reed, et al., 1987), biota (Lewis and Lewis, 1979; Becker et al., 1988; NOAA, 1988), and waste treatment and discharges (Hannah and Rossman, 1982). Findings that indicate widespread environmental contamination by specific chemicals would add to the importance of including those chemicals in a program of tissue monitoring.

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Summary

Clearly, those approaches are not independent. For example, regulatory priorities reflect toxicologic research, environmental monitoring, etc., and it is probable that some candidate target chemicals will satisfy several criteria. But, each approach can identify agents not currently being studied or considered in connection with the other approaches.

Design of Chemical Assay Programs

Determination of Requirements for Analytic Performance

Precision, accuracy, and sensitivity must all be adequate to meet the specified goals of the program. Analytic goals are ideally based on knowledge of the relationships among tissue concentration, exposures, and health outcomes and on the variations in tissues concentrations that might be attributed to individual variations, to systematic variations in exposure, and to the time course of exposure. Such information is rarely available in practice, but analytic precision, sensitivity, and accuracy should be great enough to permit detection and measurement of exposures well below any plausible threshold of clinically evident effects.

Decisions regarding type of detection method to be used or whether multiple target chemicals are to be included in a single assay (and if so, which ones) will depend on the analytic performance required. Specificity and sensitivity are closely related; when analytic needs are defined on the basis of high unit toxicity or a need to detect an agent in tissues of persons exposed at background concentrations, a dedicated assay may be required for the specific agent or a group of agents.

Development and Validation of Method

Ways of developing and validating specific analytic techniques should be specified in considerable detail and then applied to each chemical in the initial set or added later. At a minimum, method development will include modification of existing protocols and methods developed for use in other applications or taken from the scientific literature, so that one can demonstrate adequate performance for the specific target chemicals, tissue sample type, and concentration range desired. Some of the steps (not necessarily in order) are:

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
  • Demonstration that the method is adequately sensitive to detect each target chemical by assay of appropriate coded (blind) standards.

  • Demonstration of adequate recovery of target chemicals in sample preparation and instrumental assay steps through analysis of standard mixtures in a blank (matrix-free) solution.

  • Demonstration of adequate control of interference by chemicals in the sample background through analysis of both blank samples and spiked matrix samples.

  • Demonstration of good overall recovery of target chemicals from representative samples. Actual (unfortified) samples that have been assayed thoroughly are needed for this step, because biologically incorporated target chemicals might not be as readily isolated from the sample as would a spiked contaminant.

Several of those steps should be performed in replicates, so that assay variability can be assessed. More extensive method development will be required for analytic needs or target chemicals that do not conform closely to an existing protocol. If new or improved separation steps or methods of detection are needed, they must be developed before the steps outlined above.

Once a method is demonstrated to meet stipulated analytical requirements, a validation study should establish the performance of the method with real samples over a realistic period and, if possible, with a range of operators, equipment, and laboratories. Precision would be characterized with replicate and coded (blind) analysis or assay of control materials, if available. Method accuracy would be established with reference samples or interlaboratory comparisons.

Completion of this formalized method development and performance evaluation is necessary to support quantitative uses of monitoring results. Without such knowledge of system recoveries and performance, tissue concentrations cannot be defined and negative results cannot be properly interpreted.

Design of Quality Assurance

A detailed quality-assurance (QA) plan should formalize the analytic procedures for each assay. If results are to be acceptable it is necessary to specify calibration materials, acceptable levels for blanks, recovery samples, replicate analyses, other control samples, and the frequency with which procedures are applied. QA plans can also specify preventive-maintenance schedules for instruments, how data are to be validated, and what remedial procedures are to be used when QA procedures detect unacceptable results. The overall

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

intent is to build into the assay a system of diagnostic measurements that detect and correct degradation of analytic performance. Two tools of particular value in maintaining long-term analytic stability are the benchmark sample and the graphic control chart.

The benchmark sample is of the same type as study samples and ideally has detectable concentrations of several or all of the target chemicals. It is of known stability and is prepared in many multiple replicate subsamples. The chemical homogeneity of these subsamples is established by assay of a statistical fraction of the total number of aliquots prepared. The sample might be composited from many individual samples, provided that the blending process achieves adequate homogeneity. Analysis of portions of the sample over time is used to detect and document changes in assay response. Correlation of assay results with the benchmark sample among methods and laboratories is used to establish reference values for the contaminants in the sample, which make it possible to verify assay accuracy and to detect assay bias.

After statistical limits are established for subsample homogeneity and assay precision in the benchmark sample (usually as a part of validation experiments), a control chart is established for individual target chemicals. Results of reanalysis of the benchmark sample are posted on this chart, and control limits (usually reflecting 95% confidence values from the validation data set) are established. Maintenance of a correct control chart allows assay acceptability to be checked on a day by day or even batch by batch (Taylor, 1985).

Identification of Additional Resources Needed

Although it is possible for any monitoring program to prepare control materials by blending a large volume of samples, an alternative is to use standard reference materials provided by NIST and other organizations. Reference materials offer several advantages over blended samples: stability and homogeneity have been well established; reference values for certified contaminants are well established and documented; and a large community of users is sharing the same materials, so that evaluation of comparability of results is enhanced. The appropriateness of existing reference materials to the needs of any monitoring program will depend on the match between matrix type, analyte list, and concentration range in standard reference materials and monitoring-program samples and target chemicals.

For a monitoring program that will continue for decades, development of reference materials should have high priority. Not only will such materials help in maintaining and documenting consistent monitoring results, but provision of portions of the materials to researchers or other monitoring programs

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

will help in establishing analytic comparability for related studies.

Among the kinds of additional resource needs that might be identified at this point are alternative methods for specific analytes that show marginal or unacceptable analytic performance; identification of intermittent contamination sources, such as particular types of containers or sampling media; and data on the chemical stability of components that display high variability of recovery.

Implementation of Method Development and Validation Studies

Analytic-method development often involves complex choices, particularly when many kinds of performance must be optimized in a single procedure. If the choices are to be optimal, an analyst who focuses on specific needs or problems in the assay scheme must work closely with the program planner who is considering future needs and larger objectives. In general terms, the process of preparing a sample for assay can be viewed as a series of steps that exclude chemical constituents from the sample, simplify the sample composition, and increase the ability to detect and measure the target chemicals that remain. Collection of components from the sample by extraction or other phase-separation techniques is the first stage. In the optimization of a method, there are commonly many solutions to a given problem. Substitution of one chromatographic medium for another and modification of the mobile phases used to partition sample components in prefractionation steps are two examples. Given a choice between two or more procedures that accomplish the basic task of removing interfering (and presumably unimportant) sample constituents, the alternative that best meets other program needs (such as a high likelihood of including agents of possible future monitoring interest) should be selected. Such an alternative should, of course, be validated in practice before it becomes a part of routine operations.

Pilot-Scale Monitoring

Pilot-scale testing will identify and help to correct problems in the various elements of a monitoring program, including collection and transmission of samples, sample management before assay, chemical measurements, data management, and reporting. Each modification of the assay opens new possibilities for unforeseen technical problems. For example, addition of new target chemicals to an otherwise unchanged assay might require alteration of materials used for sample collection, to avoid contaminating a sample with a

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

new target chemical. In particular, when a new assay is added to a program, pilot testing of that assay might prevent large-scale waste of effort and resources.

Continuing Monitoring: Review of Analytic Program and Goals

The QA plan should contain a statement of what constitutes acceptable data and acceptable assay performance. A schedule of data review and validation, with periodic QA review, should be created. Outside review of the QA plan itself is desirable, as is periodic auditing of quality control-procedures and results by a group separate from the monitoring program. The standing committee that we recommend elsewhere in this report is a possibility.

Monitoring of assay procedures will satisfy program objectives that are based on a specific monitoring need and a defined list of agents of concern. There will be incentives for further development within the narrowly defined mission to measure the same target chemicals more accurately, more quickly, and more cheaply. Not only can improved measurement technology permit dramatic increases in sensitivity and ease of measurement, but failure to keep pace with the state of practice will eventually weaken the credibility of monitoring-program results. Monitoring-program compromises imposed by analytic limitations, such as the number of assays supportable by program budgets or the requirement for compositing to ensure assay sensitivity, might be reduced or eliminated as technology improves.

The desire to extend the monitoring program to new agents and to recognize otherwise unanticipated exposures is a second reason to encourage developmental tasks within a monitoring program. Reasons for incorporating new agents into a national monitoring program are to respond to needs and concerns broader than individual regulatory programs and to realize additional benefits from the considerable resources that a monitoring program requires. Exploratory activities within a monitoring program can provide an anticipatory approach to hazard recognition and provide for efficient application of new findings in the basic program. Incorporation of new agents into existing assay protocols and development of new protocols to address new monitoring goals can be planned as continuing activities.

Exploratory Analyses

Exploratory analyses are of two sorts: those that attempt to catalog nontar-

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

get contaminants as they occur in monitoring of sample preparations and those that seek to detect classes of chemicals that are not expected to occur in significant concentrations in assay-sample fractions but would be of great interest if they did. The latter kind might use sample-preparation procedures that differ from assay procedures or instrumental detection techniques other than the assay techniques used in monitoring. Results will be qualitative or at best semiquantitative, because method recoveries and other performance would not have been determined and instrument response calibration with valid standards might not have been possible.

“Volunteer” Chemicals in Monitoring Assays

Modern assay techniques, such as GC-MS, permit a degree of qualitative analysis of sample constituents other than target chemicals. Mass spectrometry as a detection and quantitation method typically involves collection and storage of sequential mass spectra representing the entire detectable portion of the sample or solution analyzed. Computerized comparisons with massspectrum libraries can tentatively identify some proportion of “unknown” components, if the library of standards contains mass spectra similar to the unknown spectrum from the sample. The reliability of a tentative identification of an unknown component will depend on the intensity and purity of the unknown spectrum and on the nature of the chemical detected. Confirmation of tentative identifications with standards to demonstrate matching mass spectral and gas chromatographic behavior is required. Alternatively, when sufficient quantities of the unknown can be isolated from a sample, the identities of the unknown might be determined by mass-spectrum interpretation combined with traditional techniques for the elucidation of chemical structure (infrared, and ultraviolet spectroscopy, nuclear magnetic resonance, elemental analysis, and high-resolution mass spectrometry). The undertaking is time-consuming and expensive, so a standardized approach might be desirable for deciding which unknowns should be identified. Some considerations might be apparent concentration (i.e., intensity of GC-MS peak); frequency of detection; mass-spectral features that suggest anthropogenic origins such as patterns indicative of chlorine or bromine atoms; or similarity of mass spectra to those of known toxicants.

Alternative Detection Methods

The versatility and specificity of GC-MS make it the most widely used tool

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

for environmental monitoring of organic contaminants in environmental samples. Under electron-impact ionization conditions, it is possible to generate similar mass spectra from a variety of instrument designs, so large publicdomain mass-spectrum libraries can be used. The adoption of GC-MS by EPA for many of its monitoring methods has led to further standardization of MS instrumental characteristics. However, several techniques are important complements to standard GC-MS. Chemical ionization improves detection of chemicals that show excessive fragmentation under electron-impact ionization conditions. Both positive and negative chemical ionization can also be used selectively to improve detection of chemicals with higher gas-phase proton or electron affinities, as well as providing molecular-weight information. Although those techniques are not widely used for routine monitoring, they are particularly useful for detecting traces of halogenated chemicals, such as PCDDs (Dougherty et al., 1980).

Other emerging techniques can address those chemicals that are not detectable by any gas chromatographic technique because they are nonvolatile or thermally unstable. Among those methods are new interface designs to permit high-performance liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry (LC-MS) (Covey et al., 1986) and supercritical-fluid chromatography and mass spectrometry (SFC-MS) (Smith et al., 1986). Secondary-ion mass spectrometry with collisional activation, an MS-MS technique (Tondeur et al., 1987), is another approach that permits detection, identification, and ultimately quantitation of nonvolatile chemicals at low concentrations in biologic samples. Each of those techniques could play a useful role in exploratory analyses, and their incorporation into monitoring protocols will soon be feasible. The newer techniques open the way for detection of polar metabolites of toxic agents, as well as of “refractory” toxicants. Innovative uses of new approaches to develop new information for human-tissue monitoring should be encouraged.

Alternative Sample-Preparation Schemes

Exploration of alternative sample extraction and prefractionation techniques should occur as new analytic techniques are developed. “Throwaway” fractions obtained from monitoring protocols that are not amenable to conventional GC-MS analysis could be screened with LC-MS, SFC-MS, and MS-MS. Supercritical-fluid extraction methods (Kalinoski et al., 1986) and microcolumn liquid-chromatographic methods (Ozretich and Schroeder, 1986) are receiving wide attention for use in sample preparation.

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

Establishing Goals for New Assay Technology

It is critically important in selecting exploratory projects to consider all available information that bears on the presence and metabolic fate of toxicants. Without clear hypotheses regarding possible positive findings, exploratory analyses become “fishing expeditions” with little likelihood of producing useful results. Close coordination with environmental monitoring programs, as well as with bioassay and other toxicity-testing programs, is essential. Program design in this field will need to rely on scientific advisers who are familiar with the state of analysis and toxicology and who can realistically assess the probable benefit of a given exploratory program.

PRACTICAL LIMITATIONS AND COMPROMISES

Several kinds of compromises can reduce overall costs associated with a monitoring program. Some reduce development costs and lead time, some reduce the number of assays needed for monitoring, and some reduce the cost per assay. Reductions in development costs can be achieved by targeting analytes with similar chemical properties to minimize the number or complexity of analytic protocols or by combining method development with actual sample analysis. Both approaches have some merit, although as noted above, they also have disadvantages and risks.

Methods to Reduce the Number of Analyses

Compositing of Samples

According to the present analytic schemes for extractable semivolatile chemicals and dioxins and furans, there is no compelling need to composite individual specimens. (The NHATS’s decision to composite samples was driven by cost, not sensitivity.) Current detection limits are in the low nanograms-per-gram range for semivolatile chemicals and the low picograms-pergram range for dioxin and furans for assay of a 1% aliquot of a 20 gram tissue sample (semivolatile chemicals) or a 10% aliquot of a 10-g tissue sample (dioxins and furans). Revision of sample-size standards, fraction used per assay, and target-tissue collection amount could permit analysis of individual samples in most cases. As a reason for compositing samples, cost must be balanced against the statistical limitations imposed by compositing.

Two situations in which compositing is reasonable are method-development

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

studies (where a feasibility-study scale is preferred to a full scale) and qualitative and exploratory assays, where larger tissue pools are needed and where the cost per sample is much higher than for monitoring analysis. Composite samples are needed in developing large, uniform quantities of standard reference materials.

Subsampling or Stratified Assays

An alternative to compositing is subsampling; individual samples are selected from a larger pool. The issues in selecting a subsample are primarily statistical; however, limited chemical analyses might be used to select tissues with substantial burdens of a few chemicals that may be markers for other exposures. “More exposed” and “less exposed” persons might be identified for subsample analysis, on the basis of hypothesized or demonstrated relationships between the results of detailed monitoring and the results of use of indicator chemicals.

Less-Frequent Analysis or Staggered Assays

The schedule of analysis, the frequency of reporting, and the overall delay from specimen collection to publication of results need special attention in any monitoring program. Too-frequent reporting will result in unnecessary costs and perhaps obscure critical findings, because the amount of new data in each report will be small. Delay of publication, whatever the reasons, diminishes the value of the data, and the loss of value increases with increasing delay, even to the point where findings can be of little current interest. A staggered schedule for statistical analysis and reporting can break the overall workload into more manageable tasks, but at the cost of a larger administrative burden (more reports), the loss of some information on joint exposure, and a loss of attention in the user community.

Special Studies

The characterization of particular exposure situations, such as a geographic region of high environmental contamination or those that focus on special subpopulations, is more efficiently addressed by special studies than by a nationwide survey. Special studies are crucial to the NHMP goal of establishing links among quantitative environmental contamination, specific targeted

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

exposures and tissue concentrations, and the goal of detecting new exposures. EPA has used special studies to respond to interests and needs outside the NHMP itself. However, one way for EPA to reduce analytic costs while meeting its stated program goals for national monitoring is to use special studies in conjunction with other cost-reduction strategies such as less-expensive analyses, shortened target-chemical lists, and methods with less-than-maximal sensitivity. FDA’s “sensitivity of the method” approach—that without human data, data from the most sensitive species should be considered to be most like data that might be gathered from humans—established a regulatory precedent, but that option runs counter to the 1982 decision to extend and modernize the chemical analyses in the NHATS program. Furthermore, NHATS uses multichemical analytic schemes, and the incremental savings achieved by deleting one or a few analytes is small. It seems inappropriate to raise any current detection limit requirements, because few agents are routinely detected at concentrations that would be reached with less-sensitive analysis.

CURRENT AND PREVIOUS ANALYTIC PRACTICES OF THE NHATS PROGRAM

The chemical agents listed in Table 6–1 as fiscal year 1982 target chemicals were intended to cover anthropogenic classes that had been reported in published analyses of human adipose tissue, including phthalate esters, phosphate triesters, polychlorinated aromatics, polychloroterphenyls, polybrominated biphenyls, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, in addition to the organochlorine pesticides and PCBs already monitored. In general, those chemicals either have been reported to occur in adipose tissue or could be expected to accumulate there, because of their lipophilicity and (in some cases) resistance to metabolic conversion to less lipophilic products.

Several ways were used to nominate new target chemicals. Although some basis for their selection can be inferred from the EPA literature supplied to the committee, the rationale is not clear. For example, the inclusion of brominated dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans as target chemicals without method validation in the planned analysis of 1986 specimens was based not on prior detection in adipose tissue, but on “the potential for exposure to brominated analogues of dioxins and furans from specific brominated commercial products” (MRI, 1988).

Another gap in the apparent rationale is the inclusion of additional “one-time” efforts to survey elemental composition and volatile organic compounds in 1982 adipose-tissue samples. Distribution into adipose tissues is known to

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

TABLE 6–1 NHATS Target Compounds

I. Target compounds: semivolatile analysis protocol

 

 

History or Sourcea

Compound

CAS No.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Pesticides

Lindane (γ-BHC)

58–89–9

X

X

 

X

 

Mirex

2385–85–58

X

 

X

 

Chlordane

57–74–9

X

X

 

X

 

Heptachlor

76–44–8

X

X

 

X

 

Endrin

7221–93–4

X

 

X

 

Endrin ketone

 

X

 

X

 

X

 

Dieldrin

60–57–1

X

 

X

 

X

X

 

p,p’-DDT

50–29–3

X

 

X

 

Aldrin

309–00–2

X

X

X

 

X

 

α-BHC

319–84–6

X

 

X

 

X

 

β-BHC

319–85–7

X

 

X

 

X

 

δ-BHC

319–86–8

X

 

X

 

X

 

Heptachlor expoxide

1024–57–3

X

 

X

 

t-Nonachlor

39765–80–5

X

 

X

 

o,p’-DDT

789–02–6

X

 

X

 

o,p’-DDE

3424–82–6

X

 

X

 

p,p’-DDE

72–55–9

X

 

X

X

 

p,p’-DDD

53–19–0

X

 

X

 

Oxychlorodane

26880–48–8

X

 

X

X

 

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

 

History or Sourcea

Compound

CAS No.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Isophoroneb

78–59–1

 

X

X

 

Dicofolb

115–32–2

 

X

 

Dichlorvosb

62–73–7

 

X

 

X

 

Methoxychlorb

72–43–5

 

X

 

X

 

Nitrofenb

1836–75–5

 

X

 

X

 

Butachlorb

23184–66–9

 

X

 

Chlorpyrifosc

2921–88–2

 

X

 

Isopropalinc

33820–53–0

 

X

 

Perthanec

72–56–0

 

X

 

Trichloronatec

327–98–0

 

X

 

Chlorinated Aromatics

1,3-Dichlorobenzene

541–73–1

 

X

X

X

 

1,4-Dichlorobenzene

106–46–7

 

X

X

X

X

 

1,2-Dichlorobenzene

95–50–1

 

X

X

X

X

 

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene

120–82–1

 

X

X

X

X

 

Hexachlorobenzene

118–74–1

X

X

X

X

X

 

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene

87–61–6

 

X

X

 

1,3,5-Trichlorobenzene

108–70–3

 

X

X

 

1,2,3,4-Tetrachlorobenzene

634–66–2

 

X

X

 

1,2,3,5-Tetrachlorobenzene

634–90–2

 

X

X

 

1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene

95–44–3

 

X

X

 

Pentachlorobenzene

608–93–5

 

X

X

 

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

Hexachloronaphthalenec

1335–87–1

 

X

 

Octachloronaphthalenec

2234–13–1

 

X

 

Pentachloroanisolec

 

X

 

Pentachloronitrobenzene

82–68–8

 

X

 

2,3,6-Trichlorophenolc

933–75–5

 

X

 

2,4,5-Trichlorophenolc

95–95–4

 

X

 

2,4,6-Trichlorophenolc

88–06–2

 

X

 

2,3,6-Trichloroanisolec

50375–10–5

 

X

 

2,3,5-Trichloroanisolec

54135–80–7

 

X

 

2,4,6-Trichloroanisolec

87–40–1

 

X

 

Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)

 

Napthalene

91–20–3

 

X

X

X

X

 

Phenanthrene

85–01–8

 

X

X

X

 

Flouranthrene

206–44–0

 

X

X

X

 

Chrysene

218–01–9

 

X

X

X

 

Benzoapyrene

50–32–8

 

X

 

X

 

Acenaphthylene

208–96–8

 

X

 

Acenaphthene

83–32–9

 

Flourene

86–73–7

 

X

 

Phenathrene

85–01–8

 

Pyrene

129–00–0

 

X

 

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

 

History or Sourcea

Compound

CAS No.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Anthracenec

120–12–7

 

X

 

X

 

Benzoaanthracenec

56–55–3

 

X

X

 

X

 

Benzoaflouranthenec

205–99–2

 

X

X

 

X

 

Dibenzoa, hanthracenec

53–70–2

 

X

X

 

X

 

Indeno1,2,3-cdpyrenec

193–39–5

 

X

X

 

X

 

Benzokflouranthenec

207–08–9

 

X

 

PCBsb

Monochlorobiphenyl

2735–18–8

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Dichlorobiphenyl

25512–42–9

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Trichlorobiphenyl

25323–68–6

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Tetrachlorobiphenyl

26914–33–0

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Pentachlorobiphenyl

25429–29–2

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Hexachlorobiphenyl

26601–64–9

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Heptachlorobiphenyl

28655–71–2

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Octachlorobiphenyl

314–83–0

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Nonachlorobiphenyl

53742–07–7

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Decachlorobiphenyl

2051–24–3

 

X

X

 

X

X

 

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

Phthalate esters

Dimethyl phthalate

131–11–3

 

X

X

X

 

Dibutyl phthalate

84–74–2

 

X

X

X

X

 

Butylbenzyl phthalate

85–68–7

 

X

 

X

 

Di-n-octyl phthalate

117–84–0

 

X

 

X

X

 

Diethyl phthalate

84–66–2

 

X

X

 

Di-n-butyl phthalate

84–74–2

 

X

X

 

Diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP)

117–81–7

 

X

X

 

Phosphate triesters

Tributylphosphate

126–73–8

 

X

 

Triphenylphosphate

115–86–6

 

X

 

Tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate

115–96–8

 

X

X

 

Tributoxyethylphosphate

78–51–3

 

X

 

Tritolylphosphate

1330–78–5

 

X

 

Tris(dichloropropyl)phosphate

n/a

 

X

 

Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate

126–72–7

 

X

 

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

 

History or Sourcea

Compound

CAS No.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Other

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane

96–12–8

 

X

 

X

 

Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene (HCBD)

87–68–3

 

X

X

X

 

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene

77–47–4

 

X

 

X

 

Biphenyl

92–52–4

 

X

 

X

 

2-Phenylphenol

90–43–7

 

X

 

X

4-Chloro-p-terphenyl

 

X

 

Tetrabromobiphenyl

 

X

 

Pentachlorodiphenyl ether

 

X

 

o-Cymene (o-isopropyl toluene)

527–84–4

 

X

m-Cymene (m-isopropyl toluene)

535–77–3

 

X

 

p-Cymene (p-isopropyl toluene)

99–87–6

 

X

D-Limonene

5898–27–5

 

X

DL-Isoborneol

124–76–5

 

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

1-Indanone

83–33–0

 

2-Indanone

615–13–4

 

2-Methoxy-3-methylpyrazine

2847–30–5

 

Butylated Hydroxytoluene

128–37–0

 

Ethyl hydrocinnamate

2021–28–5

 

Coumarin

91–64–5

 

Octamethyl cyclotetrasiloxane

556–67–2

 

Cumenec

98–82–8

 

X

 

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzenec

95–63–6

 

X

 

Quinolinec

91–22–5

 

X

 

Dibenzofuranc

132–64–9

 

X

 

X

 

Chlorbenzilatec

510–15–6

 

 

X

 

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)adipatec

103–23–1

 

X

 

o-Xylenec

95–47–6

 

X

m-Xylenec

141–93–5

 

X

p-Xylenec

105–05–5

 

X

2-Ethoxy benzaldehydec

613–69–4

 

X

1-Nonenec

124–11–8

 

X

1-Pentanolc

71–41–0

 

X

Hexyl acetatec

142–92–7

 

X

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

 

History or Sourcea

Compound

CAS No.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

II. Target Compounds: PCDD, PCDF Protocol

 

 

X

 

Chlorinated dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans

 

X

 

2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin

 

X

 

1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzodioxin

 

X

 

1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzodioxin

 

X

 

1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzodioxin

 

X

 

1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzodioxin

 

X

 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzodioxin

 

X

 

Octachlorodibenzodioxin

 

X

 

2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran

 

X

 

1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran

 

2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran

 

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran

 

X

 

1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran

 

X

 

1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzofuran

 

X

 

2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran

 

X

 

1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzofuran

 

X

 

1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorodibenzofuran

 

X

 

Octachlorodibenzofuran

 

X

 

Polybrominated dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans

 

2,3,7,8-tetrabromodibenzodioxind

 

1,2,3,7,8-pentabromodibenzodioxind

 

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

 

History or Sourcea

Compound

CAS No.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

1,2,3,4,7,8-hexabromodibenzodioxind

 

2,3,7,8-tetrabromodibenzofurand

 

1,2,3,7,8-pentabromodibenzofurand

 

1,2,3,4,7,8-hexabromodibenzofurand

 

a A: Historical NHATS pesticide analyte (1970–1981)

B: SARA 313 chemical list

C: SARA/ATSDR 110 chemical list

D: EPA Method 1625 analyte

E: Target analyte in analysis of fiscal year 1982 adipose tissue samples

F: Bioaccumulative pollutant study target analyte, EPA contract 68–01–6951, WA7 and 13

G: Analytes previously qualitatively identified in broad scan analysis of fiscal year 1982 specimens

bIndividual congeners used as standards; detected as mixtures in historical NHATS surveys

cNonvalidated target analytes for qualitative analysis

dNonvalidated target analytes for quantitative analysis

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

play an important short-term role in the toxicokinetic behavior of many common volatile solvents, but they are not known to accumulate in adipose tissue over long periods. The methods used for sample collection and storage had not been validated for volatile chemicals, and the committee questions the integrity of the samples for those applications. Little information exists on the concentrations of trace elements in adipose tissues from normal, abnormal, or overexposed persons, and the diagnostic value of such measurements is uncertain. The assays are not planned for incorporation into routine monitoring of adipose tissues.

Selection of analytic methods was generally based on methods already used and reported in published applications to analysis of adipose tissues (Macleod et al., 1982), other tissues (Norstrom et al., 1986), and environmental samples (Lopez-Avila et al., 1981). The general NHATS approach consists of exhaustive extraction of tissue with a lipid solvent such as methylene chloride; prefractionation of the extract with size-exclusion chromatography to remove the bulk of biologic (predominantly lipid) background material from the extract; additional prefractionation with one or more conventional (adsorption-partition) column chromatographic steps to separate out the least polar (aliphatic) components and to separate interfering groups of target chemicals (e.g., toxaphene or other chemicals from PCBs); and final instrumental detection and quantitation with high-resolution GC/low-resolution MS. The scheme for sample analysis as presented generally in the 1989 “Program Strategy” document and more specifically in the reports resulting from the initial applications of those methods to adipose samples (Mack and Stanley, 1984) is shown in Table 6–2.

The analysis of 1982 samples according to the new methods took place in 1984–1985 and was reported in 1986. Additional validation and method-development studies were undertaken concurrently with and after the 1982 tissue analyses. All four of the new analytic projects (semivolatile chemicals, dioxins and furans, trace elements, and volatile chemicals) are most properly regarded primarily as method-development exercises and only secondarily as tissue surveys. Because of the lack of prior method validation, the results of those analyses are referred to in the respective project reports as concentration estimates.

An intermethod comparability study that used historical and 1984 samples was initiated to compare the historical pesticide-survey method with the pesticide results obtained under the 1982 protocol. That effort was carried out at a contracting laboratory other than the one that had performed the 1982 method development and analysis. Some problems in applying the newer protocols were reported, and results of the study are not yet released. Additional method development and application of the semi volatile-chemical

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

TABLE 6–2 NHATS Analytic Efforts

Collection Year

Activity

Analytes

Assay Method

Completion Date or Status

1970–1981

Monitoring

OCl pesticides

PGC/ECDa

Annual

1982

R&D, survey

OCl pesticides, semivolatiles

HRGC/MSb

1986

 

R&D, survey

Volatiles

HRCG/MSc

1986

 

R&D, survey

Trace elements

ICP, NAAd

1986

 

Validation

PCDDs, PCDFs

HRGC, MSe

1986

 

R&D, survey

PCDDs, PCDFs

HRCG/MSb

1986

 

Exploration

Unknown peaks

HRGC/MSf

1986

1983

Monitoring

OCl pesticides

PGC/ECDa

Partially published

1984

Comparability study

OCl pesticides, semivolatiles

PGC/ECDa vs. HRCG/MSb

Under review

1985

No analyses

n/a

n/a

n/a

1986

Monitoring

OCl pesticides, semivolatiles

HRGC/MSb

In progress

 

Exploratory

Unknown peaks

HRGC/MSf

In progress

1987

Monitoring

PCDDs, PCDFs

HRGC/MSb

Under review

 

R&D, survey

PBDDs, PBDFs

HRGC/MSb

In progress

1988

Analyses being planned

n/a

n/a

n/a

aModified Mills-Gaither-Olney pesticide method with low-resolution gas chromatography with electron-capture detection.

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

bExtraction, size exclusion, and adsorption chromatographic sample prefractionation with high-resolution gas chromatography and mass-spectrometry detection.

cPurge and trap collection of vapors from an aqueous slurry of tissue sample with high-resolution gas chromatography and mass spectrometry detection.

dAcid sample digestion and quantitation with atomic-absorption spectrometry or inductively coupled plasma atomic-emission spectroscopy.

eSolid-phase extraction and digestion of lipid matrix, adsorption chromatographic prefractionation on graphitized carbon, with high-resolution gas chromatography and mass-spectrometry detection and high-resolution mass-spectrometry confirmation of key analytes.

fExtraction, size exclusion, and adsorption chromatographic sample prefractionation with high-resolution gas chromatography/mass spectrometry detection; unknown peak screening by mass spectral library comparison to reference spectra and to previously observed unknown components.

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

(“broad-scan”) protocol has occurred since then, but no formal results have been released.

The target chemicals listed in part I of Table 6–1 were taken from the QA planning document for the most recent round of analysis (1986 sample year). Target chemicals designated with superscripts c and d are planned for inclusion as “qualitative” or “quantitative” analytes. Method validation has not been performed, but these chemicals are detectable with the GC-MS method to be used, and standards are available.

The most successful of the method-development and validation projects, and one that resulted in the production of a well-documented protocol as a basis for future monitoring, was the dioxin-furan project. Several documents presented the accomplishments in PCDD and PCDF analysis. The first is a report of an analysis of 1982 tissue-survey samples that used developmental methods. The analytic work took place from the fall of 1984 through the winter of 1985 (EPA, 1986a). The report reflects an improvisational approach to the analytic method that is incompatible with monitoring goals, because EPA, through the NHATS, had attempted to implement methods that were not fully tested and validated. One must infer which analysis produced which results by examining the size of the tissue aliquot reported (Tables 5–14 in that report). For given target chemicals, different samples were assayed with different methods. Some samples were assayed with two methods, and that would presumably produce results for the complete list of target chemicals for each method, but the results are reported for one method for some analytes and for the other method for other analytes. Comparison of results of the two methods is limited to mean and standard deviation of recoveries for the two sets of data. No side-by-side comparison of results for each preparation method is shown, although such data were presumably generated. The consequences of that approach include the use of multiple methods of sample preparation when the method initially adopted was judged to be inadequate for some samples of target chemicals, lack of clarity about which methods produce which results, and uncertainty regarding comparability of results of the two methods. Method-related uncertainties, and a generally tentative level of confidence in the quality of the analysis are reflected in the following language of the report: “The data for a sample reported based on the original protocol may be considered suspect based on the possible differences in the recoveries of these chemicals according to the two methods used”. “A continued effort in following the trends of PCDD and PCDF will require that the analytical method…be fully validated through intra- and interlaboratory studies.”

The second report describes method-development and validation work that was largely after the initial application of the methods to study samples (EPA,

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

1986b). The effort addressed several of the problems of the previous results. The report is a good model for future method-development and validation projects. It discusses several prerequisites of the production of fully usable data: method precision, accuracy, sensitivity, and stability are characterized in a statistical manner; control materials and comparison results are developed and validated; and a step-by-step approach to quality control throughout the analytic protocol is developed.

The revision of the latter project report contained in the third document indicates an intention to use the control material developed previously as a continuing quality control element (MRI, 1988). Additional planning for sample and data management and quality control are also reported.

Preliminary efforts like those reported in the second and third documents provide a good basis for a monitoring effort. However inclusion of new but related chemicals in the overall framework of such a program introduces new risks. For example, the proposed inclusion of brominated analogues of PCDD and PCDFs as target chemicals without an explicit validation effort is a short cut that can lead to “messy” and unsatisfactory results. Overall confidence in the results of the program would be strengthened if results of “try it and see” assays of study samples were more clearly distinguished from results of well-validated analyses.

The NHATS or its successor must document the rationale and specific analysis that result in program decisions during each year’s planning to add or delete target chemicals.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The NHATs project reports show several encouraging characteristics. Some of the weaknesses identified and discussed in the previous section have been recognized by EPA and its contractors, and efforts to remedy them are evident. Within the definition of each analytic task, the contractor has demonstrated a competent and sometimes innovative approach to analytic-method development. The most recent reports and planning documents show a good understanding of quality-assurance planning and quality-control techniques. In summary, there is no reason to doubt that the program can attain state-of-the-art analysis. The principal concerns in this regard would be with constraints imposed on the analytic effort by inadequacies of agency planning and direction, budgeting, or long-term commitment to a program of human-tissue monitoring.

Several factors make the need for analysis of program goals and a sound planning process critical: the need to balance innovative method development

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

with the maintenance of stable assays for monitoring; the open-ended nature of the analytic effort and the cost per sample; the need for sufficient analyses to achieve sampling and statistical goals; and the inherently multiagency and multiuse nature of the program, which requires strong coordination among agencies and with other sources of technical information vital to program planning.

Definition of Goals

Efforts to date have been oriented toward those chemicals that previous reports suggested could be detected with present protocols.

Once the agency has established the relative importance of various possible uses of the data, the rationales for selecting target chemicals should be incorporated into a systematic weighting scheme and ap plied as comprehensively as is feasible.

Criteria for determining the relative importance of a candidate target chemical should be separated from issues of analytic feasibility until late in the planning. The identification of one or several analytes that might require a new assay protocol could be important in planning future method development.

Problems are likely to occur when method-development projects are concurrent with tissue monitoring (as in the 1982 samples). Design of an adaptable monitoring program with mechanisms for selection of new analytes and for development and validation of collection, storage, and assay methods will permit the monitoring program to remain responsive to current needs and to take advantage of progress in analytic technology.

Formalization of the Planning Process

Present reports do not address the larger issues underlying selection of project goals, nor do they provide insight into the information and alternatives considered in defining those goals. The result is an appearance of arbitrary program decisions; in some cases, decisions regarding the choice of analytic method seem to reflect a “shotgun” approach (e.g., elemental analysis of adipose tissue and possibly the volatile-chemicals projects).

The program would benefit from regular strategic planning by the agency, frequent agency consultation with program contractors, scien tific peer review, and advice from interested federal agencies.

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

Those efforts would maximize the likelihood of a clear decision-making process and one that is well documented and understood.

Critical Evaluation of Program Results

Evaluation of data should be a continuing part of program reporting.

One limitation common to all the project reports produced in the 1980’s is that they report very little analysis of final results beyond analytic validity. Data sets are a prime product of a monitoring program, but interpretation of findings in relation to larger program goals (such as time trends, efficacy of interventions, relative importance of different environmental contaminants, and regional or demographic trends in exposures) is an important part of understanding and meeting additional data needs. It seems to the committee that only NHMP itself has broad responsibility for making certain that the program is productive in relation to its larger goals.

Links to Analytic-Methods Research

Analytic-methods research is conducted within EPA, in other government programs, and in academe and the private sector.

The NHATS must be in a position to articulate and, within EPA, influence research priorities for development of new analytic applica tions of emerging technology and to benefit from new developments.

Analytic-program managers must be specifically charged with the formulation of analytic needs and maintenance of awareness of potentially useful developments. The committee doubts that leadership in analysis can be effectively delegated to contracting organizations, and it believes that EPA must maintain substantially more activity and expertise in this regard.

Regular Schedule of Analyses

The analytic effort has been modified from year to year since 1981, and developmental activities have supplanted monitoring to some degree. The NHATS has released data from only 1 collection year for each of the new sets of analytes. Including current efforts, there are data from only 2 collection

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×

years (3 years for the broad-scan pesticides, if the comparability study is included).

Priority should be given to setting and maintaining a schedule for analysis of results of each assay type.

Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"6. Chemical Assay of Specimens." National Research Council. 1991. Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1787.
×
Page 142
Next: 7. Program Design and Management Issues »
Monitoring Human Tissues for Toxic Substances Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $50.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The National Human Monitoring Program (NHMP) identifies concentrations of specific chemicals in human tissues, including toxicologic testing and risk assessment determinations. This volume evaluates the current activities of the NHMP; identifies important scientific, technical, and programmatic issues; and makes recommendations regarding the design of the program and use of its products.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!