Cargando…

Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review

Methyl methacrylate (MMA) is a respiratory irritant and dermal sensitizer that has been associated with occupational asthma in a small number of case reports. Those reports have raised concern that it might be a respiratory sensitizer. To better understand that possibility, we reviewed the in silico...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Borak, Jonathan, Fields, Cheryl, Andrews, Larry S, Pemberton, Mark A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa Healthcare 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21401327
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10408444.2010.532768
_version_ 1782201582507524096
author Borak, Jonathan
Fields, Cheryl
Andrews, Larry S
Pemberton, Mark A
author_facet Borak, Jonathan
Fields, Cheryl
Andrews, Larry S
Pemberton, Mark A
author_sort Borak, Jonathan
collection PubMed
description Methyl methacrylate (MMA) is a respiratory irritant and dermal sensitizer that has been associated with occupational asthma in a small number of case reports. Those reports have raised concern that it might be a respiratory sensitizer. To better understand that possibility, we reviewed the in silico, in chemico, in vitro, and in vivo toxicology literature, and also epidemiologic and occupational medicine reports related to the respiratory effects of MMA. Numerous in silico and in chemico studies indicate that MMA is unlikely to be a respiratory sensitizer. The few in vitro studies suggest that MMA has generally weak effects. In vivo studies have documented contact skin sensitization, nonspecific cytotoxicity, and weakly positive responses on local lymph node assay; guinea pig and mouse inhalation sensitization tests have not been performed. Cohort and cross-sectional worker studies reported irritation of eyes, nose, and upper respiratory tract associated with short-term peaks exposures, but little evidence for respiratory sensitization or asthma. Nineteen case reports described asthma, laryngitis, or hypersensitivity pneumonitis in MMA-exposed workers; however, exposures were either not well described or involved mixtures containing more reactive respiratory sensitizers and irritants.The weight of evidence, both experimental and observational, argues that MMA is not a respiratory sensitizer.
format Text
id pubmed-3072694
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Informa Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30726942011-04-12 Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review Borak, Jonathan Fields, Cheryl Andrews, Larry S Pemberton, Mark A Crit Rev Toxicol Review Article Methyl methacrylate (MMA) is a respiratory irritant and dermal sensitizer that has been associated with occupational asthma in a small number of case reports. Those reports have raised concern that it might be a respiratory sensitizer. To better understand that possibility, we reviewed the in silico, in chemico, in vitro, and in vivo toxicology literature, and also epidemiologic and occupational medicine reports related to the respiratory effects of MMA. Numerous in silico and in chemico studies indicate that MMA is unlikely to be a respiratory sensitizer. The few in vitro studies suggest that MMA has generally weak effects. In vivo studies have documented contact skin sensitization, nonspecific cytotoxicity, and weakly positive responses on local lymph node assay; guinea pig and mouse inhalation sensitization tests have not been performed. Cohort and cross-sectional worker studies reported irritation of eyes, nose, and upper respiratory tract associated with short-term peaks exposures, but little evidence for respiratory sensitization or asthma. Nineteen case reports described asthma, laryngitis, or hypersensitivity pneumonitis in MMA-exposed workers; however, exposures were either not well described or involved mixtures containing more reactive respiratory sensitizers and irritants.The weight of evidence, both experimental and observational, argues that MMA is not a respiratory sensitizer. Informa Healthcare 2011-03 2011-03-14 /pmc/articles/PMC3072694/ /pubmed/21401327 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10408444.2010.532768 Text en © 2011 Informa Healthcare USA, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Supplemental Terms and Conditions for iOpenAccess articles published in Informa Healthcare journals (http://www.informaworld.com/mpp/uploads/iopenaccess_tcs.pdf) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Borak, Jonathan
Fields, Cheryl
Andrews, Larry S
Pemberton, Mark A
Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review
title Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review
title_full Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review
title_fullStr Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review
title_full_unstemmed Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review
title_short Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A Critical review
title_sort methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: a critical review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072694/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21401327
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10408444.2010.532768
work_keys_str_mv AT borakjonathan methylmethacrylateandrespiratorysensitizationacriticalreview
AT fieldscheryl methylmethacrylateandrespiratorysensitizationacriticalreview
AT andrewslarrys methylmethacrylateandrespiratorysensitizationacriticalreview
AT pembertonmarka methylmethacrylateandrespiratorysensitizationacriticalreview