Exhaled Ethanol and Acetaldehyde in Human Subjects Exposed to Low Levels of Ethanol

Aldehyde dehydrogenase in solid tumors and other diseases: Potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets

The family of aldehyde dehydrogenases (ALDHs) contains 19 isozymes and is involved in the oxidation of endogenous and exogenous aldehydes to carboxylic acids, which contributes to cellular and tissue homeostasis. ALDHs play essential parts in detoxification, biosynthesis, and antioxidants, which are of important value for cell proliferation, differentiation, and survival in normal body tissues. However, ALDHs are frequently dysregulated and associated with various diseases like Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and especially solid tumors. Notably, the involvement of the ALDHs in tumor progression is responsible for the maintenance of the stem-cell-like phenotype, triggering rapid and aggressive clinical progressions. ALDHs have captured increasing attention as biomarkers for disease diagnosis and prognosis. Nevertheless, these require further longitudinal clinical studies in large populations for broad application. This review summarizes our current knowledge regarding ALDHs as potential biomarkers in tumors and several non-tumor diseases, as well as recent advances in our understanding of the functions and underlying molecular mechanisms of ALDHs in disease development. Finally, we discuss the therapeutic potential of ALDHs in diseases, especially in tumor therapy with an emphasis on their clinical implications.

Washout kinetics of ethanol from the airways following inhalation of ethanol vapors and use of mouthwash

Introduction: Breath analyzers are commonly used to test for alcohol intoxication, i.e., elevated systemic levels of ethanol, at workplaces and among vehicle drivers. However, local low-dose exposure to ethanol in the mouth or airways may temporarily increase the breath-alcohol concentration (BrAC) without the systemic ethanol level being affected, leading to false positive test results. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of local ethanol exposure on the BrAC.Methods: Eleven healthy adults (six women) were exposed to on average 856 mg/m³ ethanol vapor for 15 min, followed by repeat collection of exhaled breath in Tedlar bags. One hour later, the subjects washed their mouth for 30 s with a typical mouthwash containing 22% ethanol and post-exposure breaths were again collected repeatedly. Negligible systemic uptake of ethanol was confirmed by analysis of blood sampled before, between and after the exposures. Ethanol in breath and blood was analyzed by gas chromatography.Results: No or very low levels (less than 0.002 mg/g) of ethanol were detected in blood at any time point, indicating negligible systemic uptake. The decline in breath was mono-exponential after both exposures with average half times of 0.4 (range 0.3-0.8) min after inhalation exposure and 1.9 (1.1-3.0) min after mouthwash. BrAC levels in the first sample, collected a few seconds after exposure, were 0.14 (0.07-0.13) mg/L after inhalation and 4.4 (2.7-6.0) mg/L after mouth wash. On average, it took 0.5 (0.06-0.7) min and 11 (6-15) min, respectively, for the BrAC to fall below the Swedish statutory limit of 0.1 mg/L air.Conclusion: In practice, use of breath analysis should not be a problem even if the subject inhaled ethanol vapors before the test. In contrast, use of ethanol-containing mouthwash results in a false positive test if sampling is done within 15 min.

Clinical breath analysis: discriminating between human endogenous compounds and exogenous (environmental) chemical confounders

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath originate from current or previous environmental exposures (exogenous compounds) and internal metabolic (anabolic and catabolic) production (endogenous compounds). The origins of certain VOCs in breath presumed to be endogenous have been proposed to be useful as preclinical biomarkers of various undiagnosed diseases including lung cancer, breast cancer, and cardio-pulmonary disease. The usual approach is to develop difference algorithms comparing VOC profiles from nominally healthy controls to cohorts of patients presenting with a documented disease, and then to apply the resulting rules to breath profiles of subjects with unknown disease status. This approach to diagnosis has a progression of sophistication; at the most rudimentary level, all measurable VOCs are included in the model. The next level corrects exhaled VOC concentrations for current inspired air concentrations. At the highest level, VOCs exhibiting discriminatory value also require a plausible biochemical pathway for their production before inclusion. Although these approaches have all shown some level of success, there is concern that pattern recognition is prone to error from environmental contamination and between-subject variance. In this paper, we explore the underlying assumptions for the interpretation and assignment of endogenous compounds with probative value for assessing changes. Specifically, we investigate the influence of previous exposures, elimination mechanisms and partitioning of exogenous compounds as confounders of true endogenous compounds. We provide specific examples based on a simple classical pharmacokinetic approach to identify potential misinterpretations of breath data and propose some remedies.

Impact of emerging pollutants on pulmonary inflammation in asthmatic rats: ethanol vapors and agglomerated TiO2 nanoparticles

CONTEXT

Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (nano-TiO(2)) and ethanol vapors are air contaminants with increasing importance. The presence of a pathological pulmonary condition, such as asthma, may increase lung susceptibility to such contaminants.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate if exposure to inhaled ethanol vapors or nano-TiO(2) can modulate the rat pulmonary inflammatory response resulting from an allergic asthmatic reaction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Brown Norway rats were sensitized (sc) and challenged (15 min inhalation, 14 days later) with chicken egg ovalbumin (OVA). Leukocytes were counted in bronchoalveolar lavages (BAL) performed at 6, 24, 36, 48 and 72 h following the challenge and either after ethanol exposures (3000 ppm, 6 h/day, daily) or at 48 h (peak inflammation) for nano-TiO(2) exposures (9.35 mg/m(3) aerosol for 6 and 42 h after the OVA challenge). For the nano-TiO(2) exposures, plasma and BAL cytokines were measured and lung histological analyzes were performed.

RESULTS

Exposure to ethanol did not significantly affect BAL leukocytes after OVA challenge. Exposure to nano-TiO(2) significantly decreased BAL leukocytes compared to OVA-challenged controls. Plasma and BAL IL-4, IL-6, and INF-γ levels were also decreased in the nano-TiO(2) group.

DISCUSSION

While ethanol vapors do not modify the pulmonary inflammation in rats during an asthmatic response, a surprising protective effect for agglomerated nano-TiO(2) was observed. A putative mechanistic basis involving a decrease in the Th2 response caused by OVA is proposed.

CONCLUSION

Allergic pulmonary inflammation is not up-regulated by inhalation of the pollutants ethanol and nano-TiO(2). On the contrary, nano-TiO(2) decreases lung inflammation in asthmatic rats.

Assessment of exposure to ethanol vapors released during use of Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs by healthcare workers

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing use of Alcohol-Based Hand Rub solutions, few studies have quantified the concentrations of inhaled ethanol.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess ethanol exposure during hygienic and surgical hand disinfection practices.

METHOD

Ethanol concentrations were measured at the nose level of a wooden dummy and human volunteers. Two systems were used in parallel to determine short-term ethanol vapor exposures: activated charcoal tubes followed by gas chromatography analysis and direct reading on a photoionization detector (PID). Exposure was assessed for 4 different sequences (N=10) reproducing hand rubs for simple surgery, nursing care, intensive care and surgical scrub.

RESULTS

The ethanol concentrations measured were of a similar order between the dummy and volunteers. The concentrations obtained by PID were higher than the gas chromatography values for the simple care (45%) and nursing care (27%) sequences and reflected specific exposure peaks of ethanol, whereas ethanol concentrations were continuously high for intensive care (440 mg m(-3)) or surgical scrub (650 mg m(-3)).

CONCLUSION

Ethanol concentrations were similar for these two exposure assessment methods and demonstrated a relationship between handled doses and inhaled doses. However, the ethanol vapors released during hand disinfection were safe for the healthcare workers.

Assessment of exposure to alcohol vapor from alcohol-based hand rubs

This study assessed the inhaled dose of alcohol during hand disinfection. Experiments were conducted with two types of hand rub using two hand disinfection procedures. Air samples were collected every 10 s from the breathing zone, by bubbling through a mixture of K₂Cr₂O₇ and H₂SO₄. The reduction of dichromate ions in the presence of alcohols was followed by UV-vis spectrophotometry. The difference in intensity of the dichromate absorption peak was used to quantify the alcohol concentration expressed in ethanol equivalent. During hygienic hand disinfection, the mean ethanol equivalent concentrations peaked at around 20–30 s for both hand rubs (14.3 ± 1.4 mg/L for hand rub 1 and 13.2 ± 0.7 mg/L for hand rub 2). During surgical hand disinfection, two peaks were found at the same time (40 and 80 s) for both hand rubs. The highest mean concentrations were 20.2 ± 0.9 mg/L for hand rub 1 and 18.1 ± 0.9 mg/L for hand rub 2. For hand rub 1, the total absorbed doses, calculated from ethanol with an inhalation flow of 24 L/min and an absorption rate of 62%, were 46.5 mg after one hygienic hand disinfection and 203.9 mg after one surgical hand disinfection. Although the use of ABHRs leads to the absorption of very low doses, sudden, repeated inhalation of high alcohol concentrations raises the question of possible adverse health effects.

Collection of biological samples in forensic toxicology

Forensic toxicology is the study and practice of the application of toxicology to the purposes of the law. The relevance of any finding is determined, in the first instance, by the nature and integrity of the specimen(s) submitted for analysis. This means that there are several specific challenges to select and collect specimens for ante-mortem and post-mortem toxicology investigation. Post-mortem specimens may be numerous and can endow some special difficulties compared to clinical specimens, namely those resulting from autolytic and putrefactive changes. Storage stability is also an important issue to be considered during the pre-analytic phase, since its consideration should facilitate the assessment of sample quality and the analytical result obtained from that sample. The knowledge on degradation mechanisms and methods to increase storage stability may enable the forensic toxicologist to circumvent possible difficulties. Therefore, advantages and limitations of specimen preservation procedures are thoroughfully discussed in this review. Presently, harmonized protocols for sampling in suspected intoxications would have obvious utility. In the present article an overview is given on sampling procedures for routinely collected specimens as well as on alternative specimens that may provide additional information on the route and timing of exposure to a specific xenobiotic. Last, but not least, a discussion on possible bias that can influence the interpretation of toxicological results is provided. This comprehensive review article is intented as a significant help for forensic toxicologists to accomplish their frequently overwhelming mission.

An assessment of potential cancer risk following occupational exposure to ethanol

Recognition of the carcinogenic properties of ethanol has resulted from comprehensive evidence regarding the effect of consumption of alcohol; indeed, ethanol in alcoholic beverages is now considered a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. However, there is little information on the effects of ethanol following exposure via the occupationally relevant routes of inhalation and dermal exposure. This review therefore focuses on these exposure routes, to assess potential carcinogenic risk associated with occupational exposure to ethanol. Inhalatory exposure at the current occupational exposure limit (OEL) for the United Kingdom (1000 ppm ethanol over an 8-h shift) was estimated to be equivalent to ingestion of 10 g ethanol (approximately 1 glass of alcohol) per day. However, in the occupational setting the dose-rate delivery of this amount of ethanol is low, allowing for its rapid and effective elimination, for the majority of individuals. Similarly, while dermal absorption in an occupational setting could potentially add to overall body ethanol burden, additional carcinogenic risk of such exposure is considered negligible. Thus, on balance, there appears little cause to suppose occupational exposure at or below the current OEL associates with any appreciable increase in risk of cancer. However, available occupational exposure data to confirm this view are currently limited. It is also suggested that adoption of a more flexible classification regime, considering risk in the context of hazard and exposure (such as that adopted by the German MAK commission), would represent an improvement over traditional occupational risk assessment practices.