ReviewArchives of toxicology2014
Sensory irritation as a basis for setting occupational exposure limits.
Review in Archives of toxicology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 143 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chemosensory perception, symptoms and autonomic responses during chemical exposure in multiple chemical sensitivity.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2016Trial
- Classification of industrial chemicals for respiratory chemosensory irritation using the TRPV1-expressing neuronal SH-SY5Y cell model and machine learning.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- Chloramine/Chlorine Injury Treated with Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation: A Report of Two Cases.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Chemosensory tobacco product toxicology part 1: sensory mechanisms.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025Review
- The Risks Associated with Inhalation Exposure to Cosmetics and Potential for Assessment Using Lung Organoids.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Formaldehyde and asthma: a plausibility?Archives of toxicology · 2025Review
- Article
- Chloroform: MAK Value Documentation, addendum - Translation of the German version from 2022.The MAK collection for occupational health and safety · 2025Review
- Tetramethylol acetylenediurea: MAK Value Documentation - Translation of the German version from 2023.The MAK collection for occupational health and safety · 2025Review
- The Persian version of the fear of pain questionnaire mong Iranian post-surgery patients: a translation and psychometrics.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Exposure limits for indoor volatile substances concerning the general population: The role of population-based differences in sensory irritation of the eyes and airways for assessment factors.Archives of toxicology · 2024Review
- Review
- Systemic inflammatory effects of zinc oxide particles: is a re-evaluation of exposure limits needed?Archives of toxicology · 2023Article
- Plethysmograph training: A refinement for collection of respiration data in mice.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2023Article
- Examining the Influence of Chemosensation on Laryngeal Health and Disorders.Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2023Review
- Evaluating Indoor Air Phthalates and Volatile Organic Compounds in Nail Salons in the Greater New York City Area: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Generation of Human Nociceptor-Enriched Sensory Neurons for the Study of Pain-Related Dysfunctions.Stem cells translational medicine · 2022Article
- Naphthalene: irritative and inflammatory effects on the airways.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2021Article
- Gender differences in experience and reporting of acute symptoms among cleaning staff.American journal of industrial medicine · 2021Article
- Electronic Cigarette Liquid Constituents Induce Nasal and Tracheal Sensory Irritation in Mice in Regionally Dependent Fashion.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a need of guidance on how local irritancy data should be incorporated into risk assessment procedures, particularly with respect to the derivation of occupational exposure limits (OELs). Therefore, a board of experts from German committees in charge of the derivation of OELs discussed the major challenges of this particular end point for regulatory toxicology. As a result, this overview deals with the question of integrating results of local toxicity at the eyes and the upper respiratory tract (URT). Part 1 describes the morphology and physiology of the relevant target sites, i.e., the outer eye, nasal cavity, and larynx/pharynx in humans. Special emphasis is placed on sensory innervation, species differences between humans and rodents, and possible effects of obnoxious odor in humans. Based on this physiological basis, Part 2 describes a conceptual model for the causation of adverse health effects at these targets that is composed of two pathways. The first, "sensory irritation" pathway is initiated by the interaction of local irritants with receptors of the nervous system (e.g., trigeminal nerve endings) and a downstream cascade of reflexes and defense mechanisms (e.g., eyeblinks, coughing). While the first stages of this pathway are thought to be completely reversible, high or prolonged exposure can lead to neurogenic inflammation and subsequently tissue damage. The second, "tissue irritation" pathway starts with the interaction of the local irritant with the epithelial cell layers of the eyes and the URT. Adaptive changes are the first response on that pathway followed by inflammation and irreversible damages. Regardless of these initial steps, at high concentrations and prolonged exposures, the two pathways converge to the adverse effect of morphologically and biochemically ascertainable changes. Experimental exposure studies with human volunteers provide the empirical basis for effects along the sensory irritation pathway and thus, "sensory NOAEChuman" can be derived. In contrast, inhalation studies with rodents investigate the second pathway that yields an "irritative NOAECanimal." Usually the data for both pathways is not available and extrapolation across species is necessary. Part 3 comprises an empirical approach for the derivation of a default factor for interspecies differences. Therefore, from those substances under discussion in German scientific and regulatory bodies, 19 substances were identified known to be human irritants with available human and animal data. The evaluation started with three substances: ethyl acrylate, formaldehyde, and methyl methacrylate. For these substances, appropriate chronic animal and a controlled human exposure studies were available. The comparison of the sensory NOAEChuman with the irritative NOAECanimal (chronic) resulted in an interspecies extrapolation factor (iEF) of 3 for extrapolating animal data concerning local sensory irritating effects. The adequacy of this iEF was confirmed by its application to additional substances with lower data density (acetaldehyde, ammonia, n-butyl acetate, hydrogen sulfide, and 2-ethylhexanol). Thus, extrapolating from animal studies, an iEF of 3 should be applied for local sensory irritants without reliable human data, unless individual data argue for a substance-specific approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.