From science to policy: How European HBM indicators help to answer policy questions related to phthalates and DINCH exposure

Within the European Human Biomonitoring (HBM) Initiative HBM4EU we derived HBM indicators that were designed to help answering key policy questions and support chemical policies. The result indicators convey information on chemicals exposure of different age groups, sexes, geographical regions and time points by comparing median exposure values. If differences are observed for one group or the other, policy measures or risk management options can be implemented. Impact indicators support health risk assessment by comparing exposure values with health-based guidance values, such as human biomonitoring guidance values (HBM-GVs). In general, the indicators should be designed to translate complex scientific information into short and clear messages and make it accessible to policy makers but also to a broader audience such as stakeholders (e.g. NGO's), other scientists and the general public. Based on harmonized data from the HBM4EU Aligned Studies (2014-2021), the usefulness of our indicators was demonstrated for the age group children (6-11 years), using two case examples: one phthalate (Diisobutyl phthalate: DiBP) and one non-phthalate substitute (Di-isononyl cyclohexane-1,2- dicarboxylate: DINCH). For the comparison of age groups, these were compared to data for teenagers (12-18 years), and time periods were compared using data from the DEMOCOPHES project (2011-2012). Our result indicators proved to be suitable for demonstrating the effectiveness of policy measures for DiBP and the need of continuous monitoring for DINCH. They showed similar exposure for boys and girls, indicating that there is no need for gender focused interventions and/or no indication of sex-specific exposure patterns. They created a basis for a targeted approach by highlighting relevant geographical differences in internal exposure. An adequate data basis is essential for revealing differences for all indicators. This was particularly evident in our studies on the indicators on age differences. The impact indicator revealed that health risks based on exposure to DiBP cannot be excluded. This is an indication or flag for risk managers and policy makers that exposure to DiBP still is a relevant health issue. HBM indicators derived within HBM4EU are a valuable and important complement to existing indicator lists in the context of environment and health. Their applicability, current shortcomings and solution strategies are outlined

Current exposure to phthalates and DINCH in European children and adolescents - Results from the HBM4EU Aligned Studies 2014 to 2021.

Phthalates are mainly used as plasticizers for polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Exposure to several phthalates is associated with different adverse effects most prominently on the development of reproductive functions. The HBM4EU Aligned Studies (2014-2021) have investigated current European exposure to ten phthalates (DEP, BBzP, DiBP, DnBP, DCHP, DnPeP, DEHP, DiNP, DiDP, DnOP) and the substitute DINCH to answer the open policy relevant questions which were defined by HBM4EU partner countries and EU institutions as the starting point of the programme. The exposure dataset includes ∼5,600 children (6-11 years) and adolescents (12-18 years) from up to 12 countries per age group and covering the North, East, South and West European regions. Study data from participating studies were harmonised with respect to sample size and selection of participants, selection of biomarkers, and quality and comparability of analytical results to provide a comparable perspective of European exposure. Phthalate and DINCH exposure were deduced from urinary excretions of metabolites, where concentrations were expressed as their key descriptor geometric mean (GM) and 95th percentile (P95). This study aims at reporting current exposure levels and differences in these between European studies and regions, as well as comparisons to human biomonitoring guidance values (HBM-GVs). GMs for children were highest for ∑DEHP metabolites (33.6 μg/L), MiBP (26.6 μg/L), and MEP (24.4 μg/L) and lowest for∑DiDP metabolites (1.91 μg/L) and ∑DINCH metabolites (3.57 μg/L). In adolescents highest GMs were found for MEP (43.3 μg/L), ∑DEHP metabolites (28.8 μg/L), and MiBP (25.6 μg/L) and lowest for ∑DiDP metabolites (= 2.02 μg/L) and ∑DINCH metabolites (2.51 μg/L). In addition, GMs and P95 stratified by European region, sex, household education level, and degree of urbanization are presented. Differences in average biomarker concentrations between sampling sites (data collections) ranged from factor 2 to 9. Compared to the European average, children in the sampling sites OCC (Denmark), InAirQ (Hungary), and SPECIMEn (The Netherlands) had the lowest concentrations across all metabolites and ESTEBAN (France), NAC II (Italy), and CROME (Greece) the highest. For adolescents, comparably higher metabolite concentrations were found in NEB II (Norway), PCB cohort (Slovakia), and ESTEBAN (France), and lower concentrations in POLAES (Poland), FLEHS IV (Belgium), and GerES V-sub (Germany). Multivariate analyses (Survey Generalized Linear Models) indicate compound-specific differences in average metabolite concentrations between the four European regions. Comparison of individual levels with HBM-GVs revealed highest rates of exceedances for DnBP and DiBP, with up to 3 and 5%, respectively, in children and adolescents. No exceedances were observed for DEP and DINCH. With our results we provide current, detailed, and comparable data on exposure to phthalates in children and - for the first time - in adolescents, and - for the first time - on DINCH in children and adolescents of all four regions of Europe which are particularly suited to inform exposure and risk assessment and answer open policy relevant questions.This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No. 733032 HBM4EU. PCB cohort was supported by the Ministry of Health of the Slovak Republic, project no. 2012/47-SZU-11 and the Slovak Research and Development Agency, project no. APVV-0571-12. PCB cohort follow-up received additional funding from the Ministry of Health of the Slovak Republic, program 07B0103. Regarding GerES V-sub (unweighted) the funding of the German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection is gratefully acknowledged. The Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH) has contributed to funding of the Norwegian Environmental Biobank (NEB). The laboratory measurements have partly been funded by the Research Council of Norway through research projects (275903 and 268465). The Slovenian SLO-CRP study was co-financed by the Jozef Stefan Institute program P1- 0143, and a national project “Exposure of children and adolescents to selected chemicals through their habitat environment” (grant agree ment No. C2715-16-634802). Riksmaten Adolescents 2016-17 was performed by the Swedish Food Agency with financial support from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency. The BEA study was co-funded by the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Insituto de Salud Carlos III (SEG 1321/15). The CROME study is co-funded by the European Commission research funds of Horizon 2020). The 3xG study is financed by NIRAS/ONDRAF (Belgian National Agency for Radioactive Waste and enriched Fissile Material), STORA (Study and Consultation Radioactive Waste Dessel) and MONA (Mols Overleg Nucleair Afval). FLEHS IV is commissioned and co-financed by the Government of Flanders, Department of Environment & Spatial Development. POLAES study was financially supported by the Ministry of Education and Science (project no. 3764/H2020/2017/2). The CELSPAC studies are supported by the MEYS (LM2018121, CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17_043/0009632 and CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/15_003/0000469) and from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement (857560).S

From science to policy: How European HBM indicators help to answer policy questions related to phthalates and DINCH exposure.

Within the European Human Biomonitoring (HBM) Initiative HBM4EU we derived HBM indicators that were designed to help answering key policy questions and support chemical policies. The result indicators convey information on chemicals exposure of different age groups, sexes, geographical regions and time points by comparing median exposure values. If differences are observed for one group or the other, policy measures or risk management options can be implemented. Impact indicators support health risk assessment by comparing exposure values with health-based guidance values, such as human biomonitoring guidance values (HBM-GVs). In general, the indicators should be designed to translate complex scientific information into short and clear messages and make it accessible to policy makers but also to a broader audience such as stakeholders (e.g. NGO's), other scientists and the general public. Based on harmonized data from the HBM4EU Aligned Studies (2014–2021), the usefulness of our indicators was demonstrated for the age group children (6–11 years), using two case examples: one phthalate (Diisobutyl phthalate: DiBP) and one non-phthalate substitute (Di-isononyl cyclohexane-1,2- dicarboxylate: DINCH). For the comparison of age groups, these were compared to data for teenagers (12–18 years), and time periods were compared using data from the DEMOCOPHES project (2011–2012). Our result indicators proved to be suitable for demonstrating the effectiveness of policy measures for DiBP and the need of continuous monitoring for DINCH. They showed similar exposure for boys and girls, indicating that there is no need for gender focused interventions and/or no indication of sex-specific exposure patterns. They created a basis for a targeted approach by highlighting relevant geographical differences in internal exposure. An adequate data basis is essential for revealing differences for all indicators. This was particularly evident in our studies on the indicators on age differences. The impact indicator revealed that health risks based on exposure to DiBP cannot be excluded. This is an indication or flag for risk managers and policy makers that exposure to DiBP still is a relevant health issue. HBM indicators derived within HBM4EU are a valuable and important complement to existing indicator lists in the context of environment and health. Their applicability, current shortcomings and solution strategies are outlined