Cited by 47Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicalsPesticide Exposure and ToxicityOccupational Health and Safety in Workplaces

Urine phthalate determinations as an index of occupational exposure to phthalic anhydride and di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

Open access
Liss, G M, Albro, P W, Hartle, Richard W, Stringer, W T·1985·Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health

Abstract

Although it has been estimated that over 600 000 workers in the United States are exposed to di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), an animal carcinogen, and that over 100 000 are exposed to phthalic anhydride (PA), few data are available on levels of phthalates in biological fluids of these workers. For a determination of occupational exposure to PA and DEHP at a plant manufacturing DEHP from PA and 2-ethylhexanol, air samples were taken for PA and DEHP, and pre- and postshift urine samples were collected for the determination of total phthalates. Urine samples were obtained from 48 workers in jobs with high exposure to phthalates and from 47 workers in jobs with low exposure. The airborne concentrations of DEHP ranged from 20 to 4 110 micrograms/m3, and the concentrations of PA ranged from 4 to 203 micrograms/m3. The most heavily exposed workers had the highest mean postshift urine phthalate concentration (geometric mean 7.6 nmol/ml) (p = 0.015), and also the greatest mean increase (4.4 nmol/ml) in preshift to postshift urine phthalate levels. Twofold increases over the shift in urine phthalate concentration and postshift phthalate levels of greater than 10 nmol/ml were observed in 8 (25%) of 32 chemical operators, but in none of 52 other workers. These data suggest that measurement of urine phthalate levels may have utility for monitoring the exposure of workers manufacturing or using PA.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5271/sjweh.2209

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Phthalate metabolite distributions vary depending on the route of entry.

    “Phthalate metabo­ lite distributions vary depending on the route of entry (Krais et al., 2018; Liss et al., 1985; Peck and Albro, 1982).”

    From Human skin absorption of three phthalates (2024) · cites this paper as Liss et al., 1985

    The Discussion reports that monoethylhexyl phthalate was not detected in the workers’ urine, while it was known as a major metabolite in leukemia patients. But it explicitly says the metabolic fate of DEHP after inhalation or topical exposure in healthy humans was unknown; it does not establish that route of entry determines metabolite distributions. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Autian J. Toxicity and health threats of phthalate esters: Review of the literature. Environ Health Perspect 4 (1973) 3-26.
  2. Draviam EJ, Kerkay J, Pearson KH. Separation and quantitation of urinary phthalates by HPLC. Anal Lett 13 (1980) 1137-1155.
  3. Draviam EJ, Pearson KH , Kerkay J . Human metabo- lism of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate. Anal Lett 15 (1982) 1729-1750.
  4. Thomas JA, Darby TD, Wallin RF, Garvin PJ, Martis L. A review of the biological effects of di-(2-ethyl- hexyl)phthalate. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 45 (1978) 1-27. Received for publication: 11 June 1984

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liss, G. M., Albro, P. W., Hartle, R. W., & Stringer, W. T.
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health
Published
1985-10
Volume
11
Issue
5
Pages
381-387
ISSN
  • 0355-3140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1795-990X
OpenAlex
W2313018223
Cited by
47
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment & Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Pesticide Exposure and Toxicity
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
Keywords
phthalate exposure, phthalic anhydride, DEHP, urinary phthalate metabolites, occupational exposure assessment, biomonitoring, chemical plant workers, 2-ethylhexanol
MeSH terms
Air Pollutants, Occupational, Chemistry, Diethylhexyl Phthalate, Humans, Phthalic Acids, Phthalic Anhydrides, Chemical Phenomena

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review