A toxicological review of the propylene glycols.

Tox-Logic Consulting, LLC , Petaluma, CA , USA .
Critical Reviews in Toxicology (Impact Factor: 6.41). 04/2013; 43(4):363-90. DOI: 10.3109/10408444.2013.792328
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Abstract The toxicological profiles of monopropylene glycol (MPG), dipropylene glycol (DPG), tripropylene glycol (TPG) and polypropylene glycols (PPG; including tetra-rich oligomers) are collectively reviewed, and assessed considering regulatory toxicology endpoints. The review confirms a rich data set for these compounds, covering all of the major toxicological endpoints of interest. The metabolism of these compounds share common pathways, and a consistent profile of toxicity is observed. The common metabolism provides scientific justification for adopting a read-across approach to describing expected hazard potential from data gaps that may exist for specific oligomers. None of the glycols reviewed presented evidence of carcinogenic, mutagenic or reproductive/developmental toxicity potential to humans. The pathologies reported in some animal studies either occurred at doses that exceeded experimental guidelines, or involved mechanisms that are likely irrelevant to human physiology and therefore are not pertinent to the exposures experienced by consumers or workers. At very high chronic doses, MPG causes a transient, slight decrease in hemoglobin in dogs and at somewhat lower doses causes Heinz bodies to form in cats in the absence of any clinical signs of anemia. Some evidence for rare, idiosyncratic skin reactions exists for MPG. However, the larger data set indicates that these compounds have low sensitization potential in animal studies, and therefore are unlikely to represent human allergens. The existing safety evaluations of the FDA, USEPA, NTP and ATSDR for these compounds are consistent and point to the conclusion that the propylene glycols present a very low risk to human health.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ethanol is commonly used as a solvent in injectable formulations of poorly watersoluble drugs. The concentrations of ethanol in such formulations are generally considered reasonably safe. It is long known that ethanol can potentiate central effects of sedatives and tranquillizers, particularly the benzodiazepines, most likely as a result of a synergistic interaction at the GABA(A) receptor. However, whether this occurs at the low systemic doses of ethanol resulting from its use as solvent in parenteral formulations of benzodiazepines is not known. In the present study we evaluated whether a commercial ethanol-containing aqueous solution of diazepam exerts more potent anti-seizure effects than an aqueous solution of diazepam hydrochloride or an aqueous emulsion of this drug in the intrahippocampal kainate model of temporal lobe epilepsy in mice. Spontaneous epileptic seizures in this model are known to be resistant to major antiepileptic drugs. Administration of the ethanol-containing formulation of diazepam caused an almost complete suppression of seizures. This was not seen when the same dose (5 mg/kg) of diazepam was administered as aqueous solution or emulsion, although all three diazepam formulations resulted in similar drug and metabolite concentrations in plasma. Our data demonstrate that ethanol-containing solutions of diazepam are superior to block difficult-to-treat seizures to other formulations of diazepam. To our knowledge, this has not been demonstrated before and, if this finding can be translated to humans, may have important consequences for emergency treatment of acute seizures, series of seizures, and initial treatment of status epilepticus in patients.
    Epilepsy Research 10/2014; 108(10). DOI:10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2014.10.002 · 2.19 Impact Factor
  • Reviews of environmental contamination and toxicology 01/2014; 232:107-38. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-06746-9_5 · 3.63 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Over the last couple of decades, the awareness of the potential health impacts associated with early-life exposures has increased. Global regulatory approaches to chemical risk assessment are intended to be protective for the diverse human population including all life stages. However, questions persist as to whether the current testing approaches and risk assessment methodologies are adequately protective for infants and children. Here, we review physiological and developmental differences that may result in differential sensitivity associated with early-life exposures. It is clear that sensitivity to chemical exposures during early-life can be similar, higher, or lower than that of adults, and can change quickly within a short developmental timeframe. Moreover, age-related exposure differences provide an important consideration for overall susceptibility. Differential sensitivity associated with a life stage can reflect the toxicokinetic handling of a xenobiotic exposure, the toxicodynamic response, or both. Each of these is illustrated with chemical-specific examples. The adequacy of current testing protocols, proposed new tools, and risk assessment methods for systemic noncancer endpoints are reviewed in light of the potential for differential risk to infants and young children.
    Critical Reviews in Toxicology 02/2015; DOI:10.3109/10408444.2014.993919 · 6.41 Impact Factor