Essentiality, Toxicity, and Uncertainty in the Risk Assessment of Manganese

Abstract

Risk assessments of manganese by inhalation or oral routes of exposure typically acknowledge the duality of manganese as an essential element at low doses and a toxic metal at high doses. Previously, however, risk assessors were unable to describe manganese pharmacokinetics quantitatively across dose levels and routes of exposure, to account for mass balance, and to incorporate this information into a quantitative risk assessment. In addition, the prior risk assessment of inhaled manganese conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified a number of specific factors that contributed to uncertainty in the risk assessment. In response to a petition regarding the use of a fuel additive containing manganese, methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (MMT), the U.S. EPA developed a test rule under the U.S. Clean Air Act that required, among other things, the generation of pharmacokinetic information. This information was intended not only to aid in the design of health outcome studies, but also to help address uncertainties in the risk assessment of manganese. To date, the work conducted in response to the test rule has yielded substantial pharmacokinetic data. This information will enable the generation of physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models capable of making quantitative predictions of tissue manganese concentrations following inhalation and oral exposure, across dose levels, and accounting for factors such as duration of exposure, different species of manganese, and changes of age, gender, and reproductive status. The work accomplished in response to the test rule, in combination with other scientific evidence, will enable future manganese risk assessments to consider tissue dosimetry more comprehensively than was previously possible.

This article has been reviewed by the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA, and approved for publication. Mention of trade names and commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

This work was supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The work does not reflect U.S. EPA policy. The author thanks E. Kenyon, K. Sanders and J. M. Davis for comments on an earlier version of the article.