Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25325283›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2015

Human health effects of dichloromethane: key findings and scientific issues.

Paul M Schlosser, Ambuja S Bale, Catherine F Gibbons, Amina Wilkins, Glinda S Cooper

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. PLGA nanoparticles as an efficient carrier inFrontiers in immunology · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. FromApplied and environmental microbiology · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. [Determination of Dichloromethane in Blood with Headspace Gas Chromatography and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Paul M SchlosserNational Center for Environmental Assessment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA.
Ambuja S Bale
Catherine F Gibbons
Amina Wilkins
Glinda S Cooper

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe U.S. EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) completed an updated toxicological review of dichloromethane in November 2011.

objectivesIn this commentary we summarize key results and issues of this review, including exposure sources, identification of potential health effects, and updated physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling.

methodsWe performed a comprehensive review of primary research studies and evaluation of PBPK models. DISCUSSION: Hepatotoxicity was observed in oral and inhalation exposure studies in several studies in animals; neurological effects were also identified as a potential area of concern. Dichloromethane was classified as likely to be carcinogenic in humans based primarily on evidence of carcinogenicity at two sites (liver and lung) in male and female B6C3F1 mice (inhalation exposure) and at one site (liver) in male B6C3F1 mice (drinking-water exposure). Recent epidemiologic studies of dichloromethane (seven studies of hematopoietic cancers published since 2000) provide additional data raising concerns about associations with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and multiple myeloma. Although there are gaps in the database for dichloromethane genotoxicity (i.e., DNA adduct formation and gene mutations in target tissues in vivo), the positive DNA damage assays correlated with tissue and/or species availability of functional glutathione S-transferase (GST) metabolic activity, the key activation pathway for dichloromethane-induced cancer. Innovations in the IRIS assessment include estimation of cancer risk specifically for a presumed sensitive genotype (GST-theta-1+/+), and PBPK modeling accounting for human physiological distributions based on the expected distribution for all individuals 6 months to 80 years of age.

conclusionThe 2011 IRIS assessment of dichloromethane provides insights into the toxicity of a commonly used solvent.

Indexed as

Carcinogens, EnvironmentalEnvironmental PollutantsHumansLung NeoplasmsMethylene ChlorideModels, TheoreticalMutagenicity TestsNeoplasmsRisk AssessmentUnited StatesUnited States Environmental Protection AgencyCarcinogens, EnvironmentalEnvironmental PollutantsMethylene Chloride

Identifiers

PMID25325283
PMCPMC4314245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.