| Title |
Cancer effects of formaldehyde: a proposal for an indoor air guideline value
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Toxicology, May 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00204-010-0549-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gunnar Damgård Nielsen, Peder Wolkoff |
| Abstract |
Formaldehyde is a ubiquitous indoor air pollutant that is classified as "Carcinogenic to humans (Group 1)" (IARC, Formaldehyde, 2-butoxyethanol and 1-tert-butoxypropanol-2-ol. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, vol 88. World Health Organization, Lyon, pp 39-325, 2006). For nasal cancer in rats, the exposure-response relationship is highly non-linear, supporting a no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) that allows setting a guideline value. Epidemiological studies reported no increased incidence of nasopharyngeal cancer in humans below a mean level of 1 ppm and peak levels below 4 ppm, consistent with results from rat studies. Rat studies indicate that cytotoxicity-induced cell proliferation (NOAEL at 1 ppm) is a key mechanism in development of nasal cancer. However, the linear unit risk approach that is based on conservative ("worst-case") considerations is also used for risk characterization of formaldehyde exposures. Lymphohematopoietic malignancies are not observed consistently in animal studies and if caused by formaldehyde in humans, they are high-dose phenomenons with non-linear exposure-response relationships. Apparently, these diseases are not reported in epidemiological studies at peak exposures below 2 ppm and average exposures below 0.5 ppm. At the similar airborne exposure levels in rodents, the nasal cancer effect is much more prominent than lymphohematopoietic malignancies. Thus, prevention of nasal cancer is considered to prevent lymphohematopoietic malignancies. Departing from the rat studies, the guideline value of the WHO (Air quality guidelines for Europe, 2nd edn. World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, pp 87-91, 2000), 0.08 ppm (0.1 mg m(-3)) formaldehyde, is considered preventive of carcinogenic effects in compliance with epidemiological findings. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 139 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 13% |
| Researcher | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 26 | 18% |
| Unknown | 29 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 15% |
| Engineering | 18 | 13% |
| Chemistry | 14 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 12 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 34 | 24% |
| Unknown | 32 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#7,451,284
of 22,780,967 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Toxicology
#958
of 2,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,260
of 95,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Toxicology
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,967 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 95,251 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.