| Organization Name | ATSDR |
Health Canada |
IARC |
IPCS |
IPRV |
ITER PR |
NSF Intl |
RIVM |
TCEQ |
U.S.EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk Value Name | NA | NA | NA |
|
|
|
|
CR(oral) |
|
RSD |
| Risk Value (mg/kg-day) | NA | NA | NA |
|
|
|
|
NA |
|
5E-3 |
| Year | 2000 | 1993 | 1999 |
|
|
|
|
2000 |
|
2011 |
| Classification | NA | II | 2B |
|
|
|
|
NA |
|
see below |
| Target Organ | NA | NA | NA |
|
|
|
|
NA |
|
liver |
| Species | NA | NA | NA |
|
|
|
|
NA |
|
mouse |
| Study | NA | NA | NA |
|
|
|
|
NA |
|
Serota et al., 1986b; Hazleton Laboratories, 1983 |
| More Information |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
ATSDR, Health Canada, IARC, RIVM, and U.S. EPA have evaluated the carcinogenicity data for dichloromethane (methylene chloride). Health Canada classified dichloromethane as "probably carcinogenic to humans" (Group II). Health Canada did not derive an oral risk estimate citing no evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate studies in which dichloromethane was orally administered to mice or rats (Serota et al., 1986a and b, respectively). IARC classified dichloromethane as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on inadequate evidence for the carcinogenicity of dichloromethane in humans and sufficient evidence for the carcinogenicity of dichloromethane in experimental animals. The IARC evaluation considers the evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and experimental animals, as well as other data relevant to the evaluation of carcinogenicity and its mechanisms. IARC does not generally develop risk values or other estimates of potency.
EPA concluded that, under the Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (U.S. EPA, 2005a), dichloromethane is "likely to be carcinogenic in humans" by all routes of exposure. EPA calculated an oral slope factor of 2E-3 per mg/kg-day that was derived from mouse liver tumor incidence data (Hazleton Laboratories 1983; Serota et al. 1986b). EPA used mouse and human PBPK models to convert from mouse external dose to the oral slope factor expressed as an external dose. TERA converted the EPA slope factor to a risk specific dose at the 1 in 100,000 (E-5) risk level by dividing 1E-5 by the slope factor of 2E-3 per mg/(kg/day) to determine a risk specific dose (RSD) of 5E-3 mg/(kg/day). EPA noted that dichloromethane is assumed to have increased early-life susceptibility, but that data were not sufficient to develop separate risk estimates for childhood exposure. The oral slope factor was calculated from adult exposure data and does not reflect presumed early-life susceptibility for this chemical. Therefore, EPA recommended that age dependent adjustment factors (ADAFs) should be applied to this slope factor when assessing cancer risks.
RIVM determined that dichloromethane is not considered to be genotoxic to humans, and therefore, derived risk values based on a threshold approach. ATSDR has published a Toxicological Profile for Methylene Chloride. Although ATSDR discusses the carcinogenicity data in its Toxicological Profiles, it does not currently assess cancer potency or perform cancer risk assessments. Click on the green circle(s) for more information.
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: | |
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: | |
| Peer Review: | The ATSDR Toxicological Profile has undergone internal agency reviews and has been externally reviewed by a peer review panel. |
| Bibliography: | |
| For Further Information: |
ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry). 2000. Toxicological Profile for Methylene Chloride. Update. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. September. Available at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp.asp?id=234&tid=42 For the list of ATSDR minimal risk levels (MRLs), see http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls/index.html |
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: |
Owing to their limitations, the available epidemiological data are considered inadequate to assess the carcinogenicity of dichloromethane in humans. The potential carcinogenicity of dichloromethane in occupationally exposed populations has been investigated in several epidemiological studies, the most extensive of which was that of a cohort of dichloromethane-exposed male workers from the Eastman Kodak company in Rochester (Hearne et al., 1990). Based on comparison of rates in a cohort to those of both the general population and an industrial referent group, there were nonsignificant deficits in observed:expected ratios for lung cancer, liver cancer and ischemic heart disease. Deaths from other malignant neoplasms were lower (non-significant) than expected, based upon the two control populations. In an historical cohort study of workers at a fibre manufacturing plant in Rock Hill, South Carolina, excess mortality in comparison with local rates was reported for the buccal cavity and pharynx, liver and biliary passages and melanoma (Ott et al., 1983a,b; Lanes et al., 1990). However, the numbers of observed cases were extremely small and workers were exposed to other substances. Mortality in the cohort may also have been underestimated. Based upon an historical cohort study at a Dow Chemical manufacturing site in Louisiana, there was no excess mortality overall or due to cancer in workers exposed to dichloromethane and numerous other chemicals, though the power to detect such increases was low (Olsen et al., 1989). In a case-control study in a chemical production facility, there was no association between exposure to dichloromethane when 44 cases of liver and biliary tract cancer were compared to 1888 referents randomly selected from a cohort of 21,437 workers (Bond et al., 1990). In studies in which two strains of mice (Swiss, B6C3F1) were exposed by gavage to doses of up to 500 mg/kg bw/day for up to 78 weeks, there was a significant increase in lung tumours in the former strain, while only a slight increase in small lung masses in females was observed in the latter strain (Maltoni et al., 1986, 1988; Serota et al., 1986a). In Sprague-Dawley rats exposed to up to 500 mg/kg bw/day by stomach tube for 64 weeks (Maltoni et al., 1986, 1988), there was a nonsignificant increase in malignant mammary tumours. Tumour incidence in F344 rats exposed to up to 250 mg/kg bw/day dichloromethane in drinking water for two years was equivocal (Serota et al., 1986b). The lowest reported effect level for non-neoplastic effects in adequately documented investigations following chronic exposure by ingestion (drinking water) of dichloromethane is 50 mg/kg bw/day in F344 rats. At this dose, fully reversible cellular proliferation and partially reversible fatty change in the livers were observed [lowest observed effect level (LOEL)=50 mg/kg bw/day; NOEL=5 mg/kg bw/day] (Serota et al., 1986b). Only one chronic inhalation study has been conducted in mice (NTP, 1986; Mennear et al., 1988). In this bioassay, male and female B6C3F1 mice were exposed to 0, 2000 or 4000 ppm (0, 6940 or 13, 880 mg/cu.m) dichloromethane in air for 102 weeks. It was concluded that there was "clear evidence of carcinogenicity of dichloromethane for male and female B6C3F1 mice, as shown by increased incidences of alveolar/bronchiolar neoplasms and of hepatocellular neoplasms" (NTP, 1986). In the most extensive inhalation bioassays in experimental animals exposed to dichloromethane conducted to date, there have been increases in the incidence of benign and malignant tumors in the lungs of both male and female mice, benign (females only) and malignant tumors in the liver (both male and female) of mice and benign mammary tumors in male and female rats. There has also been a borderline increase in malignant liver tumours in female rats. Dichloromethane has been mutagenic in vitro and genotoxic in some studies in vivo. Therefore, dichloromethane has been classified as "probably carcinogenic to humans" (Group II). It is recognized, however, that there are clear species differences in the putatively carcinogenic pathway of metabolism of dichloromethane which are consistent with the hypothesis that humans are likely to be less sensitive than some species of experimental animals in this regard. |
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: | None |
| Peer Review: |
The Health Canada supporting documentation and assessment were approved by an interdirectorate committee of the Health Protection Branch of Health Canada and externally reviewed by Dr. A.G. Renwick of the University of Southampton, Dr. R.J. Bull of Washington State University and staff of the Information Department of BIBRA Toxicology International. Dr. L. Rhomberg of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Dr. K. Khanna of the University of Montreal and Dr. R.H. Reitz of Dow Chemical reviewed the physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling. The supporting documentation was externally reviewed by Dr. T. Green, ICI Central Toxicology Laboratory. Data identified prior to March 1993 were considered for inclusion in the Health Canada assessment. |
| Bibliography: |
Bond, G.G., E.A. McLaren, F.L. Sabel, K.M. Bodner, T.E. Lipps and R.R. Cook. 1990. Liver and biliary tract cancer among chemical workers. Am. J. Ind. Med. 18(1), 19-24. In: MRI (1991). Hearne, F.T., J.W. Pifer and F. Grose. 1990. Absence of adverse mortality effects in workers exposed to methylene chloride: an update. J. Occup. Med. 32(3), 234-240. Lanes, S.F., A. Cohen, K.J. Rothman, N.A. Dreyer and K.J. Soden. 1990. Mortality of cellulose fiber production workers. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health 16(4), 247-251. Maltoni, C., G. Cotti and G. Perino. 1986. Experimental Research on Methylene Chloride Carcinogenesis. Archives of Research on Industrial Carcinogenesis, Volume IV. C. Maltoni and M.A. Mehlman, series editors. Princeton Scientific Publishing. 244 p. Maltoni, C., G. Cotti and G. Perino. 1988. Long-term carcinogenicity bioassays on methylene chloride administered by ingestion to Sprague-Dawley rats and Swiss mice and by inhalation to Sprague-Dawley rats. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 534, 352-366. Olsen, G.W., S. Hearn, R.R. Cook and M.F. Currier. 1989. Mortality experience of a cohort of Louisiana chemical workers. J. Occup. Med. 31(1), 32-34. Ott, M.G., L.K. Skory, B.B. Holder, J.M. Bronson and P.R. Williams. 1983a. Health evaluation of employees occupationally exposed to methylene chloride. General study design and environmental considerations. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health 9(suppl. 1), 1-7. Ott, M.G., L.K. Skory, B.B. Holder, J.M. Bronson and P.R. Williams. 1983b. Health evaluation of employees occupationally exposed to methylene chloride. Mortality. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health 9(suppl. 1), 8-16. Serota, D.G., A.K. Thakur, B.M. Ulland, J.C. Kirschman, N.M. Brown, R.H. Coots and K. Morgareidge. 1986a. A two-year drinking-water study of dichloromethane in rodents. II. Mice. Fd. Chem. Toxicol. 24(9), 959-963. Serota, D.G., A.K. Thakur, B.M. Ulland, J.C. Kirschman, N.M. Brown, R.H. Coots and K. Morgareidge. 1986b. A two-year drinking-water study of dichloromethane in rodents. I. Rats. Fd. Chem. Toxicol. 24(9), 951-958. |
| For Further Information: |
Long, G., M.E. Meek, I. Caldwell, S. Bartlett and S. Savard. 1994. Dichloromethane: Evaluation of Risks to Health from Environmental Exposure in Canada. In: Environmental Carcinogenesis and Ecotoxicology Reviews, Part C of Journal of Environmental Science and Health. C12(2): 305-318. Health Canada. 1996a. Health-Based Tolerable Daily Intakes/Concentrations and Tumourigenic Doses/Concentrations for Priority Substances. Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services Canada. H46-2/96-194E. Health Canada. 1996b. Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Priority Substances List. Supporting Documentation: Health-Based Tolerable Daily Intakes/Concentrations and Tumourigenic Doses/Concentrations for Priority Substances (Unedited Version). This is the supporting document for Health Canada (1996a). Available at: http://www.tera.org/iter/HCPSL1supportdoc.pdf Environment Canada, Health Canada. 1993. Priority substances list assessment report: dichloromethane. Ottawa. Ministry of Public Works and Government Services. Available at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/contaminants/psl1-lsp1/index_e.html or at the Inquiry Centre at 1-800-668-6767 (in Canada) or 819-997-2800 (outside Canada). |
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: | |
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: | |
| Peer Review: |
Each IARC evaluation is developed by an international working group of experts, which meets to discuss and finalize the monograph text and to formulate the evaluations. Working Group members are chosen on the basis of their knowledge and experience, with due regard given to avoid situations where financial or other interests might affect the outcome of their work. The members of a Working Group are invited to serve in their individual capacities as scientists, and not as representatives of their governments or of any organization with which they are affiliated. Representatives of national and international agencies are also invited to the meetings, and others may attend as observers. |
| Bibliography: | |
| For Further Information: |
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs. Re-Evaluation of Some Organic Chemicals, Hydrazine and Hydrogen Peroxide. 1999. Volume 71, page 299. Summaries & Evaluations available at http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol71/index.php Additional information about the IARC Monographs (including ordering information and links to other Monographs) can be found at http://monographs.iarc.fr/ |
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: |
|
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: |
|
| Peer Review: |
|
| Bibliography: |
|
| For Further Information: |
|
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: |
|
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: |
|
| Peer Review: |
|
| Bibliography: |
|
| For Further Information: |
|
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: |
|
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: |
|
| Peer Review: |
|
| Bibliography: |
|
| For Further Information: |
|
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: |
|
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: |
|
| Peer Review: |
|
| Bibliography: |
|
| For Further Information: |
|
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: | |
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: | |
| Peer Review: | The RIVM toxicological profile has undergone internal reviews. |
| Bibliography: | |
| For Further Information: |
Baars AJ et al. 2001. Re-evaluation of human-toxicological maximum permissible risk levels. RIVM report no. 711701025, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands, March 2001, p 178-182. Available at http://www.rivm.nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/711701025.pdf or at http://www.rivm.nl/en/ (click on Search, type "711701025", then click on document). Previous source document: Vermeire, TG, ME van Apeldoorn, JC de Fouw and PJCM Janssen. "Voorstel voor de humaan-toxicologische onderbouwing van C-(toetsings)warden" (In Dutch). RIVM report no. 725201005. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands, February 1991, p 126-127. Report can be ordered from RIVM (see http://www.rivm.nl/en/ click on Publications, then click on "How to order" for instructions). |
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: |
|
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: |
|
| Peer Review: |
|
| Bibliography: |
|
| For Further Information: |
|
| Potential for Human Carcinogenicity: | |
|---|---|
| Quantitative Estimate: | |
| Peer Review: |
This document has been reviewed by EPA scientists, interagency reviewers from other federal agencies and White House offices, and the public, and peer reviewed by independent scientists external to the EPA. A summary and EPA's disposition of the comments received from the independent external peer reviewers and from the public is included in Appendix A of the Toxicological Review of Dichloromethane (U.S. EPA, 2011). |
| Bibliography: |
Hazleton Laboratories. 1983. 24-month oncogenicity study of methylene chloride in mice: Final report. (45-8303005). New York, NY: National Coffee Association. Unpublished full report of Serota et al. (1986b). Serota, DG; Thakur, AK; Ulland, BM; et al. 1986b. A two-year drinking water study of dichloromethane in rodents. II. Mice. Food Chem Toxicol 24(9):959-963. U.S. EPA. 2005a. Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC; EPA/630/P-03/001B. Available at http://www.epa.gov/iris/backgrd.html U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2011. Toxicological Review of Dichloromethane (CAS No. 75-09-2). In Support of Summary Information on the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC. EPA/635/R-10/003F. Available at http://www.epa.gov/iris/toxreviews/0070tr.pdf |
| For Further Information: |
Details on this chemical's assessment are available on U.S. EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). U.S. EPA, 2011. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Online. National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC. Available at http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0070.htm |