Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitisation: a comprehensive review

References

• Andrews CP, Smith JD, Johanson WG. 1979. Pulmonary effects of methyl methacrylate vapour exposure in dental students. Clin Res. 27:759A.
   Google Scholar
• [ANSES] Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l'alimentation, de l'environnement et du travail. 2017. Assessment of risks for professionals exposed to products used in nail care and decoration activities. ANSES Opinion/Collective Expertise Report on Request No. “2014-SA-0148.” [accessed 2017 October]. https://www.anses.fr/en/system/files/CONSO2014SA0148EN.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Arts J. 2020. How to assess respiratory sensitization of low molecular weight chemicals. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 225(2020):113469.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arts J, Kimber I. 2017. Azodicarbonamide (ADCA): a reconsideration of classification as a respiratory sensitiser. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 89:268–278.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arts J, Kimber I. 2018. Azodicarbonamide (ADCA): a reconsideration of classification as a respiratory sensitiser. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 94:332–333.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Norris S, et al. 2011. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 64(4):401–406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basker RM, Hunter AM, Highet AS. 1990. A severe asthmatic reaction to poly(methyl methacrylate) denture base resin. Br Dent J. 169(8):250–251.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Becker RA, Ankley GT, Edwards SW, Kennedy SW, Linkov L, Meek B, Sachana M, Segner H, Van Der Burg B, Villeneuve DL, et al. 2015. Increasing scientific confidence in adverse outcome pathways: application of tailored Bradford-Hill considerations for evaluating weight of evidence. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 72(3):514–537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betts CJ, Dearman RJ, Heylings JR, Kimber I, Basketter DA. 2006. Skin sensitization potency of methyl methacrylate in the local lymph node assay: comparisons with guinea-pig data and human experience. Contact Dermatitis. 55(3):140–147.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• [BG ETEM] BG Energie Textil Elektro Medienerzeugnisse. 2021. Exposure data for dental technicians in Germany. Personal communication to CEFIC methacrylate sector group for submission to the CLH review on MMA. Köln, Germany: Berufsgenossenschaft Energie Textil Elektro Medienerzeugnisse (BG ETEM).
   Google Scholar
• Bisesi MS. 2001. Esters of mono- and alkenyl carboxylic acids and mono-and polyalcohols. In: Bingham E, Cohrssen B, Powell CH, editors. Patty’s toxicology. Chapter 79.
   Google Scholar
• Boobis AR, Doe JE, Heinrich-Hirsch B, Meek ME, Munn S, Ruchirawat M, Schlatter J, Seed J, Vickers C. 2008. IPCS framework for analyzing the relevance of a noncancer mode of action for humans. Crit Rev Toxicol. 38(2):87–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borak J, Fields C, Andrews LS, Pemberton MA. 2011. Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: a critical review. Crit Rev Toxicol. 41(3):230–268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boverhof DR, Billington R, Gollapudi JA, Hotchkiss JA, Krieger SM, Poole A, Wiescinski CM, Woolhiser MR. 2008. Respiratory sensitization and allergy: current research approaches and needs. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 226(1):1–13.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brisman J, Andersson E, Meding B, Torén K. 2011. Increased risk of nasal symptoms in Swedish dental technicians during exposure to methyl methacrylate, rapid glue or grinding. Occup Environ Med. 2011(Suppl 1):68–A127.
   Google Scholar
• Cochrane SA, Arts JHE, Ehnes C, Hindle S, Hollnagel HM, Poole A, Suto H, Kimber I. 2015. Thresholds in chemical respiratory sensitisation. Toxicology. 333:179–194.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Darre E, Jørgensen LG, Vedel P, Jensen JS. 1992. Breathing zone concentrations of methylmethacrylate monomer during joint replacement operations. Pharmacol Toxicol. 71(3 Pt 1):198–200.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Della Torre L, Valsecchi F, Sala C, Cesana MA. 1982. Evaluation of occupational risk and biological effects in a factory of polymethylmethacrylate sheets. Lavoro Umano. 30:72–79.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• de Olim C, Begin D, Boulet LP, Cartier A, Gerin M, Lemiere C. 2015. Investigation of occupational asthma: do clinicians fail to identify relevant occupational exposures? Can Respir J. 22(6):341–3477.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dik S, Ezendam J, Cunningham AR, Carrasquer CA, van Loveren H, Rorije E. 2014. Evaluation of in silico models for the identification of respiratory sensitizers. Toxicol Sci. 142(2):385–394.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• [EC] European Chemicals Bureau. 2002. European Union - risk assessment report on methyl methacrylate. Eur Union Risk Assess Rep. 22:1–194
   Google Scholar
• [EC] European Chemicals Bureau. 2008. Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006. [accessed 2021 October 17]. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/clp/legislation.
   Google Scholar
• [EC] European Chemicals Bureau. 2016. Mutual evaluation of regulated professions. Overview of the regulatory framework in the health services sector – dental hygienists and related professions. GROW/E5. [accessed 2016 April 29]. https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjfn6TW2eP0AhUk8LsIHeB9AJAQFnoECAMQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fec.europa.eu%2Fdocsroom%2Fdocuments%2F17942%2Fattachments%2F1%2Ftranslations%2Fen%2Frenditions%2Fpdf&usg=AOvVaw2z-XClKQu46J5Jt0RsSsEt.
   Google Scholar
• [EC] European Chemicals Bureau. 2019. Proposal for harmonised classification and labelling based on regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP regulation), Annex VI, Part 2. International chemical identification: methyl methacrylate. Dossier submitter: ANSES (on behalf of the French MSCA), 14 rue Pierre Marie Curie, F-94701 Maisons-Alfort Cedex. [accessed 2019 February]. https://www.echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/032dc3bb-55fe-7f7f-5762-70722fa80c82.
   Google Scholar
• [EC] European Chemicals Bureau. 2021. Committee for risk assessment (RAC). Opinion proposing harmonised classification and labelling at EU level of methyl methacrylate, methyl 2-methylprop-2-enoate, methyl 2-methylpropenoate. CLH-O-0000006852-69-01/F. [accessed 2021 March 18]. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/6e62f500-ac37-2875-ecf1-7776d22a30b3.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2011. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment Chapter R.4: evaluation of available information, ECHA-2011-G-13-EN. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13643/information_requirements_r4_en.p. df/d6395ad2-1596-4708-ba86-0136686d205e.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2016. Practical guide: how to use alternatives to animal testing to fulfil the information requirements for REACH registration, chapter 4.1 weight of evidence, ECHA-16-B-25-EN. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/1365. 5/practical_guide_how_to_use_alternatives_en.pdf/148b30c7-c186-463c-a898-522a888a4404.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2017a. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.7a: endpoint specific guidance version 6.0. July 2017.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2017b. Weight of evidence/uncertainty in hazard assessment, background document & example. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/17169198/wo_eu_uncertainty_background_en.docx/4f2. b49ab-ade0-6ee3-e977-8abe00c21c23.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2017c. Template for weight of evidence/uncertainty in hazard assessment. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/17169198/template_for_weight_of_evidence_en.docx/eb183c2e-c360-cbce-7a58-ad2d1270e5bd.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2021a. C&L inventory. Summary of classification and labelling: gentamicin. https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database/-/discli/details/53997.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2021b. C&L inventory. Summary of classification and labelling: gentamicin sulfate (salt). https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database/-/discli/details/82702.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2021c. C&L inventory. Summary of classification and labelling: methyl methacrylate. https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database/-/discli/details/104369.
   Google Scholar
• [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2021d. Registered substances database. Methyl methacrylate. https://echa.europa.eu/registration-dossier/-/registered-dossier/15528.
   Google Scholar
• [EFSA] European Food Safety Authority. 2017. Guidance on the use of the weight of evidence approach in scientific assessments. [accessed 2017 August 3]. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.20174971/full.
   Google Scholar
• Enoch SJ, Seed MJ, Roberts DW, Cronin MT, Stocks SJ, Agius RM. 2012. Development of mechanism-based structural alerts for respiratory sensitization hazard identification. Chem Res Toxicol. 25(11):2490–2498.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [ERS] European Respiratory Society. 2014. Task force report on occupational asthma. Specific inhalation challenge in the diagnosis of occupational asthma: consensus statement. Eur Resp J. 43:1573–1587.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Feary J, Pinnock H, Cullinan P. 2016. Occupational asthma. BMJ. 353:i2658.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Froines JR, Garabrant DH. 1986. Quantitative evaluation of manicurists exposure to methyl, ethyl and isobutyl methacrylate during production of synthetic fingernails. Appl Ind Hyg. 1(2):70–74.
   Google Scholar
• [FEPPD] Fédération Européenne des Patrons Prothésistes Dentaires. 2021. FEPPD in a nutshell. https://www.feppd.eu/organisation.
   Google Scholar
• Gerberick GF, Ryan CA, Kern PS, Schlatter H, Dearman RJ, Kimber I, Patlewicz GY, Basketter DA. 2005. Compilation of historical local lymph node data for evaluation of skin sensitization alternative methods. Dermatitis. 16(4):157–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golbabaei F, Mamdouh M, Jelyani KN, Shahtaheri SJ. 2005. Exposure to methyl methacrylate and its subjective symptoms among dental technicians, Tehran, Iran. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 11(3):283–289.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, Norris S, Falck-Ytter Y, Glasziou P, Debeer H, et al. 2011. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 64(4):383–394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagberg S, Ljungkvist G, Andreasson H, Karlsson S, Barregård L. 2005. Exposure to volatile methacrylates in dental personnel. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2(6):302–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henriks-Eckerman ML, Alanko K, Jolanki R, Kerosuo H, Kanerva L. 2001. Exposure to airborne methacrylates and natural rubber latex allergens in dental clinics. J Environ Monit. 3(3):302–305.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hiipakka D, Samimi B. 1987. Exposure of acrylic fingernail sculptors to organic vapors and methacrylate dusts. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 48(3):230–237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill AB. 1965. The environment and disease: an association of causation. Proc R Soc Med. 58:295–300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holsapple MP, Jones D, Kawabata TT, Kimber I, Sarlo K, Selgrade MK, Shah J, Woolhiser MR. 2006. Assessing the potential to induce respiratory hypersensitivity. Toxicol Sci. 91(1):4–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [ISO] International Organization for Standardization. 2011. ISO 16000-6: indoor air — part 6: determination of volatile organic compounds in indoor and test chamber air by active sampling on Tenax TA sorbent, thermal desorption and gas chromatography using MS or MS-FID. https://www.iso.org/standard/52213.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Isola D, Kimber I, Sarlo K, Lalko J, Sipes IG. 2008. Chemical respiratory allergy and occupational asthma: what are the key areas of uncertainty? J Appl Toxicol. 28(3):249–253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaakkola MS, Leino T, Tammilehto L, Ylostalo P, Kuosma E, Alanko K. 2007. Respiratory effects of exposure to acrylates among dental assistants. Eur Respir J. 30(Suppl. 51):999.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvis J, Seed MJ, Elton R, Sawyer L, Agius RM. 2005. Relationship between chemical structure and the occupational asthma hazard of low molecular weight organic compounds. Occup Environ Med. 62(4):243–250.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jedrychowski WA, Fonte R. 1984. Sintomatologia cronica respiratoria e 38 sindrome ostruttiva in lavoratori di una industria chimica [Chronic respiratory symptomatology and obstructive syndrome in workers of a chemical industry]. G Ital Med Lav. 6(5-6):225–233 (Italian).
   Google Scholar
• Kennes B, Garcia-Herreros P, Dierckx P. 1981. Asthma from plexiglas powders. Clin Allergy. 11(1):49–54.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kenyon NJ, Morrissey BM, Schivo M, Albertson TE. 2012. Occupational asthma. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 43(1-2):3–13.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kimber I, Agius R, Basketter DA, Corsini E, Cullinan P, Dearman RJ, Gimenez-Arnau E, Greenwell L, Hartung T, Kuper F, et al. 2007. Chemical respiratory allergy: opportunities for hazard identification and characterisation. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 60. Altern Lab Anim. 35(2):243–265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimber I, Basketter DA, Roggeband R. 2001. Chemical respiratory allergy: classification and labelling. Toxicology. 167(2):159–162.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kimber I, Dearman RJ, Basketter DA. 2014a. Diisocyanates, occupational asthma and IgE antibody: implications for hazard characterization. J Appl Toxicol. 34(10):1073–1077.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kimber I, Dearman RJ, Basketter DA, Boverhof DR. 2014b. Chemical respiratory allergy: reverse engineering an adverse outcome pathway. Toxicology. 318:32–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimber I, Pemberton MA. 2014. Assessment of the skin sensitising potency of the lower alkyl methacrylate esters. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 70(1):24–36.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kimber I, Poole A, Basketter DA. 2018. Skin and respiratory chemical allergy: confluence and divergence in a hybrid adverse outcome pathway. Toxicol Res (Camb). 7(4):586–605.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirby BS, Doyle A, Gilula L. 2003. Acute bronchospasm due to exposure to polymethylmethacrylate vapors during percutaneous vertebroplasty. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 180(2):543–544.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Klimisch HJ, Andreae M, Tillmann U. 1997. A systematic approach for evaluating the quality of experimental toxicological and ecotoxicological data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 25(1):1–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavelle KS, Schnatter AS, Travis KZ, Swaen GMH, Pallapies D, Money C, Priem P, Vrijhof H. 2012. Framework for integrating human and animal data in chemical risk assessment. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 62(2):302–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindberg E, Iregren A, Malmberg P, Vesterberg O, Wennberg A. 1991. Health risks of exposure to methyl methacrylate (MMA) – a pilot study. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Occupational Health.
   Google Scholar
• Lozewicz S, Davison AG, Hopkirk A, Burge PS, Boldy DA, Riordan JF, McGivern DV, Platts BW, Davies D, Newman Taylor AJ. 1985. Occupational asthma due to methyl methacrylate and cyanoacrylates. Thorax. 40(11):836–839.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madanat R, Hussey D, Donahue GS, Potter HG, Wallace R, Bragdon C, Muratoglu O, Malchau H. 2016. Early lessons from a worldwide, multicenter, followup study of the recalled articular surface replacement hip system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 474(1):166–174.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maestrelli P, Henneberger PK, Tarlo S, Mason P, Boschetto P. 2020. Causes and phenotypes of work-related asthma. IJERPH. 17(13):4713.
   Google Scholar
• Malo JL, Tarlo SM, Sastre J, Martin J, Jeebhay MF, Le Moual N, Heedrick D, Platts-Mills T, Planc PD, Vandenplas O, et al. 2015. An official American thoracic society workshop report; presentations and discussion of the fifth Jack Pepys workshop on asthma in the workplace. Comparisons between asthma in the workplace and non-work-related asthma. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 12:S9–S110.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marez T, Edme JL, Boulenguez C, Shirali P, Haguenoer JM. 1993. Bronchial symptoms and respiratory function in workers exposed to methyl methacrylate. Brit J Ind Med. 50:894–898.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marez T, Shirali P, Hildebrand HF, Haguenoer JM. 1991. Increased frequency of sister chromatid exchange in workers exposed to high doses of methylmethacrylate. Mutagenesis. 6(2):127–129.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marquardt W, Seiss M, Hickel R, Reichl FX. 2009. Volatile methacrylates in dental practices. J Adhes Dent. 11(2):101–107. PMID: 19492711.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin P, Bladier C, Meek B, Bruyere O, Feinblatt E, Touvier M, Watier L, Makowski D. 2018. Weight of evidence for hazard identification: a critical review of the literature. Environ Health Perspect. 126(7):076001.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meek ME, Palermo CM, Bachman AN, North CM, Jeffrey Lewis R. 2014. Mode of action human relevance (species concordance) framework: evolution of the Bradford Hill considerations and comparative analysis of weight of evidence. J Appl Toxicol. 34(6):595–606.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mizunuma K, Kawai T, Yasugi T, Horiguchi S, Takeda S, Miyashita K, Taniuchi T, Moon CS, Ikeda M. 1993. Biological monitoring and possible health effects in workers occupationally exposed to methyl methacrylate. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 65(4):227–232.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Money CD, Tomenson JA, Penman MG, Boogaard PJ, Jeffrey Lewis RJ. 2013. A systematic approach for evaluating and scoring human data. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 66(2):241–247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monroe C. 1981. Report of a respiratory health survey of the Knoxville facility of the Rohm and Haas Company. Philadelphia (PA): Rohm and Haas. Corporate Health and Safety, Rohm and Haas Chemicals Company in Bristol, Pennsylvania 19007, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Moshe S, Krakov A. 2019. Case report: three occupational diseases in a nail technician. Occup Environ Med. 76(Suppl 1):A92.1–A92.
   Google Scholar
• Moulin P, Magnan A, Lehucher-Michel M-P. 2009. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis and asthma due to a single low molecular weight agent. J Occup Health. 51(1):91–96.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nayebzadeh A, Dufresne A. 1999. Evaluation of exposure to methyl methacrylate among dental laboratory technicians. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 60(5):625–628.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Neut D, Kluin OS, Thompson J, van der Mei HC, Busscher HJ. 2010. Gentamicin release from commercially-available gentamicin-loaded PMMA bone cements in a prosthesis-related interfacial gap model and their antibacterial efficacy. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 11:258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nishiwaki Y, Saitoh T, Taklbayashi T, Tanaka S, Etoh N, Eitaki Y, Omaf K. 2001. Cross-sectional study of health effects of methyl methacrylate monomer among dental laboratory technicians. J Occup Health. 43(6):375–378.
   Google Scholar
• North CM, Ezendam J, Hotchkiss JA, Maier C, Aoyama K, Enoch S, Goetz A, Graham C, Kimber I, Karjalainen A, et al. 2016. Developing a framework for assessing chemical respiratory sensitization: a workshop report. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 80:295–309.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• [NTP] National Toxicology Program, Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health. 1992. National Toxicology Program chemical repository database. Research Triangle Park (NC): National Institutes of Health.
   Google Scholar
• [NTP] National Toxicology Program. 2015. New OHAT handbook for conducting systematic reviews. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/update/2015/1/ohat-handbook/index.html.
   Google Scholar
• [NTP] National Toxicology Program. 2019. Updates and clarification to the OHAT approach for systematic review and evidence integration. Research Triangle Park (NC): National Institutes of Health. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/ohat/pubs/handbookclarificationmarch2019_508.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Obando SU, Fernández-Nieto M, Sastre J. 2013. Occupational asthma due to polyvinyl chloride and methy lmethacrylate, “hidden in an adhesive. Clin Transl Allergy. 3:P32.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• OECD. 2011. Health at a glance 2011: OECD indicators. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Parhar A, Lemiere C, Beach JR. 2011. Barriers to the recognition and reporting of occupational asthma by Canadian pulmonologists. Can Respir J. 18(2):90–96.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pausch FE, Jacobi S, Clajus P, Lehr H. 1994. Medical examination of workers in acrylic sheet production exposed to methyl methacrylate. Report to Roehm GmbH. Darmstadt, Germany: Röhm Gmbh, Kirschenallee.
   Google Scholar
• Pemberton MA, Kimber I. 2021. Classification of chemicals as respiratory allergens based on human data: requirements and practical considerations. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 123:104925.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickering CA, Bainbridge D, Birtwistle IH, Griffiths DL. 1986. Occupational asthma due to methyl methacrylate in an orthopaedic theatre sister. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 292(6532):1362–1363.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pickering CAC, Niven R, Simpson J. 1993. A study of the prevalence of occupational asthma at the ici acrylics site at Darwen, Lancashire. Manchester, UK: North West Lung Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Piirilä P, Kanerva L, Keskinen H, Estlander T, Hytonen M, Tuppurainen M, Nordman H. 1998. Occupational respiratory hypersensitivity caused by preparations containing acrylates in dental personnel. Clin Exp Allergy. 28(11):1404–1411.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reynaud-Gaubert M, Philip-Joet F, Arnaud A. 1991. Professional asthma due to methylmethacrylate ([French]). Presse Med. 20(8):386–386.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rooney AA, Boyles AL, Wolfe MS, Bucher JR, Thayer KA. 2014. Systematic review and evidence integration for literature-based environmental health science assessments. Environ Health Perspect. 122(7):711–718.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth E, Kristiansen CB, Assing KD, Weinreich UM. 2017. Work-related asthma in an orthopaedic surgeon. Ugeskr Laeger. 179(30):1682–1684.
   Google Scholar
• Rumpf KW, Rieger J, Jansen J, Scherer M, Seubert S, Seubert A, Sellin HJ. 1986. Quincke's edema in a dialysis patient after administration of acrylic bone cement: possible role of ethylene oxide allergy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 105(4):250–252.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sass-Kortsak AM, Purdham JT, Bozek PR, Murphy JH. 1992. Exposure of hospital operating room personnel to potentially harmful environmental agents. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 53(3):203–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sauni R, Kauppi P, Alanko K, Henriks-Eckerman ML, Tuppurainen M, Hannu T. 2008. Occupational asthma caused by sculptured nails containing methacrylates. Am J Ind Med. 51(12):968–974.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Savonius B, Keskinen H, Tuppurainen M, Kanerva L. 1993a. Occupational respiratory disease caused by acrylates. Clin Exp Allergy. 23(5):416–424.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savonius B, Keskinen H, Tuppurainen M, Kanerva L. 1993b. Erratum: occupational respiratory disease caused by acrylates. Clin Exp Allergy. 23:712.
   Google Scholar
• [SCENIHR] Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly-Identified Health Risks. 2012. Memorandum on the use of the scientific literature for human health risk assessment purposes, weighing of evidence and expression of uncertainty. http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/emerging/docs/scenihr_s_001.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• [SCHEER] Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks. 2018. Memorandum on weight of evidence and uncertainties, revision 2018. https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/default/files/scientific_committees/scheer/docs/scheer_o_014.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Scherpereel A, Tillie‐Leblond I, Pommier de Santi P, Tonnel AB. 2004. Exposure to methyl methacrylate and hypersensitivity pneumonitis in dental technicians. Allergy. 59(8):890–892.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• [SETAC] Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 2018. Weight-of-evidence in environmental risk assessment of chemicals, SETAC technical issue paper. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.setac.org/resource/resmgr/publications_and_resources/setac_tip_weight_of_evidence.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Shofer S, Haus BM, Kuschner WG. 2006. Quality of occupational history assessments in working age adults with newly diagnosed asthma. Chest. 130(2):455–462.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Spencer AB, Estill CF, McCammon JB, Mickelsen RL, Johnston OE. 1997. Control of ethyl methacrylate exposures during the application of artificial fingernails. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 58(3):214–218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stauffer E, Dolan JA, Newman R. 2008. Flammable and combustible liquids. In: Fire debris analysis. Burlington: Academic Press; p. 199–233.
   Google Scholar
• Suojalehto H, Suuronen K, Cullinan P, Lindström I, Sastre J, Walusiak-Skorupa J, Munoz X, Talini D, Klusackova P, Moore V, et al. 2019a. Phenotyping occupational asthma caused by acrylates in a multicenter cohort study. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 8(3):971–979.e1. Erratum in: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021;9(8):3234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suojalehto H, Suuronen K, Cullinan P. 2019b. Specific challenge testing for occupational asthma: revised handbook. Eur Respir J. 54(2):1901026.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sullivan KM, Enoch SJ, Ezendam J, Sewald K, Roggen EL, Cochrane S. 2017. An adverse outcome pathway for sensitization of the respiratory tract by low-molecular weight chemicals: building evidence to support the utility of in vitro and in silico methods. Appl In Vitro Toxicol. 3(3):213–226.
   Google Scholar
• Tarlo SM, Lemiere C. 2014. Occupational asthma. N Engl J Med. 370(7):640–649.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorette C, Grigoriu B, Canut E, Sobaszek A, Tonnel AB, Tillie-Leblond I. 2006. Pulmonary disease in dental laboratory technicians. Rev Mal Respir. 23(Suppl 2):4S8–4S16.
   Google Scholar
• Tiotiu AI, Novakova S, Labor M, Emelyanov A, Mihaicuta S, Novakova P, Nedeva D. 2020. Progress in occupational asthma. IJERPH. 17(12):4553.
   Google Scholar
• Torbica N, Krstev S. 2006. World at work: dental laboratory technicians. Occup Environ Med. 2006 Feb63(2):145–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UK HSE. 2001. Asthmagen? Critical assessments of the evidence for agents implicated in occupational asthma. UK Health and Safety Executive, Redgrave Court, Merton Road, Bootle, Merseyside, L20 7HS, UK. https://www.hse.gov.uk/asthma/asthmagen.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ungers LJ, Vendrely TG. 2006. Comparison of sampling and analytical methods used during the preparation of methyl methacrylate bone cements. J Occup Environ Hyg. 3(7):351–357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ungers LJ, Vendrely TG, Barnes CL. 2007. Control of methyl methacrylate during the preparation of orthopedic bone cements. J Occup Environ Hyg. 4(4):272–280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uriarte SA, Fernández-Nieto M, Sastre J. 2013. Occupational asthma due to polyvinyl chloride and methyl methacrylate in a plumber. Investig Allergol Clin Immunol. 23(6):437–438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vallieres M, Cockcroft DW, Taylor DM, Dolovich J, Hargreave FE. 1977. Dimethyl ethanolamine-induced asthma. Am Rev Respir Dis. 115(5):867–871. 1977
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vandenplas O. 2011. Occupational asthma: etiologies and risk factors. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 3(3):157–167.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vandenplas O, Suojalehto H, Aasen TB, Baur X, Burge PS, de Blay F, Fishwick D, Hoyle J, Maestrelli P, Muñoz X, et al. 2014. Specific inhalation challenge in the diagnosis of occupational asthma: consensus statement. Eur Respir J. 43(6):1573–1587.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vandenplas O, Suojalehto H, Cullinan P. 2017. Diagnosing occupational asthma. Clin Exp Allergy. 47(1):6–18.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Walters GI, Robertson AS, Moore VC, Burge PS. 2017. Occupational asthma caused by acrylic compounds from SHIELD surveillance (1989-2014). Occup Med (Lond). 67(4):282–289.
   Google Scholar
• Wittczak T, Palczynski C, Szulc B, Gorski P. 1996. Bronchial asthma with inflammation of the nose mucous membrane induced by occupational exposure to methyl methacrylate in a dental technician. Med Pr. 47:259–266.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wittczak T, Walusiak J, Ruta U, Pałczynski C. 2003. Occupational asthma and allergic rhinitis due to xerographic toner. Allergy. 58(9):957.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• [WHO/IPCS] World Health Organisation/International Programme on Chemical Safety. 1998. World Health Organisation international programme on chemical safety. Concise international chemical assessment document no. 4. Methyl methacrylate. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/42030/9241530049.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• [WHO/IPCS] World Health Organisation/International Programme on Chemical Safety. 2005. Chemical specific adjustment factors for interspecies differences and human variability: guidance document for use of data in dose/concentration-response assessment. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/43294.
   Google Scholar
• [WHO/IPCS] World Health Organisation/International Programme on Chemical Safety. 2010. Guidance on principles of characterising and applying PBPK models in risk assessment https://www.who.int/ipcs/methods/harmonization/areas/pbpk_models.pdf?ua=1.
   Google Scholar
• [WHO/IPCS] World Health Organisation/International Programme on Chemical Safety. 2014. Guidance on evaluating and expressing uncertainty in hazard assessment is available in harmonization project document no. 11 https://www.who.int/ipcs/methods/harmonization/uncertainty_in_hazard_characterization.pdf.
   Google Scholar