MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119836615 · doi:10.1186/1745-6673-6-9

Elimination kinetics of diisocyanates after specific inhalative challenges in humans: mass spectrometry analysis, as a basis for biomonitoring strategies

2011· article· en· W2119836615 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational exposure and asthma
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBiomonitoringIsocyanateUrineChromatographyGas chromatography–mass spectrometryMass spectrometryMedicineMetaboliteGas chromatographyChemistryEnvironmental chemistryToxicologyOrganic chemistryBiologyInternal medicinePolyurethane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Isocyanates are some of the leading occupational causes of respiratory disorders, predominantly asthma. Adequate exposure monitoring may recognize risk factors and help to prevent the onset or aggravation of these aliments. Though, the biomonitoring appears to be most suitable for exposure assessment, the sampling time is critical, however. In order to settle the optimal time point for the sample collection in a practical biomonitoring approach, we aimed to measure the elimination of isocyanate urine metabolites. METHODS: A simple biomonitoring method enabling detection of all major diamine metabolites, from mono-, poly- and diisocyanates in one analytical step, has been established. Urine samples from 121 patients undergoing inhalative challenge tests with diisocyanates for diagnostic reasons were separated by gas chromatography and analyzed with mass spectrometry (GC-MS) at various time points (0-24 h) after the onset of exposure. RESULTS: After controlled exposures to different concentrations of diisocyanates (496 ± 102 ppb-min or 1560 ± 420 ppb-min) the elimination kinetics (of respective isocyanate diamine metabolites) revealed differences between aliphatic and aromatic isocyanates (the latter exhibiting a slower elimination) and a dose-response relationship. No significant differences were observed, however, when the elimination time patterns for individual isocyanates were compared, in respect of either low or high exposure or in relation to the presence or absence of prior immunological sensitization. CONCLUSIONS: The detection of isocyanate metabolites in hydrolyzed urine with the help of gas chromatography combined with mass spectrometric detection system appears to be the most suitable, reliable and sensitive method to monitor possible isocyanate uptake by an individual. Additionally, the information on elimination kinetic patterns must be factored into estimates of isocyanate uptake before it is possible for biomonitoring to provide realistic assessments of isocyanate exposure. The pathophysiological elimination of 1,6-hexamethylene diamine, 2,4-diamine toluene, 2,6-diamine toluene, 1,5-naphthalene diamine, 4,4'-diphenylmethane diamine and isophorone diamines (as respective metabolites of: 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate, 2,4-toluene diisocyanate and 2,6 toluene diisocyanate, 1,5-naphthalene diisocyanate, 4,4'-diphenylmethane diisocyanate and isophorone diisocyanates) differs between individual isocyanates' diamines.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it