A simple pharmacokinetic model to characterize exposure of Americans to Di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate

A simple pharmacokinetic model to predict concentrations of metabolites of di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate, DEHP, in humans starting from intakes of DEHP was developed and applied. This model predicts serum and urine concentrations of five DEHP metabolites: MEHP, 5oxo-MEHP, 5OH-MEHP, 5cx-MEPP, and 2cx-MMHP. The model was calibrated using data from an individual who dosed himself with 48.5mg DEHP, and then took blood and urine samples over a 44-h period. The calibrated model was then used in two applications: one on a second set of individuals whose exposure to DEHP was through PVC medical devices in a blood platelet donation procedure, and one on background exposures in the United States (US). Based on 2001/02 NHANES data, median US background urine concentrations of MEHP, 5OH-MEHP, and 5oxo-MEHP are 4.1, 20.1, and 14.0 mg/l, respectively. Creatine and urine volume-correction approaches were used to backcalculate an average daily dose of DEHP in the range of 0.6-2.2 mg/kg per day. A "background cohort" including 8 individuals and 57 complete days of urination were assumed to be exposed to 1.5 mu g/kg per day, spread out in equal doses of 0.3 mu g/kg per day at 0900, 1200, 1500, 1800, and 2100 h. The average predicted urine concentrations were 4.6, 15.9, and 9.4 mu g/l for MEHP, 5OH-MEHP, and 5oxo-MEHP. These are similar, but the two secondary metabolites are slightly lower than medians found in NHANES. This slight difference between the NHANES results and the background simulations could have been due to differences in metabolism between the individual who provided the calibration data (61-year-old Caucasian male) and the general US population. Another explanation evaluated was that urine concentrations further from the time of exposure may have larger disparities between MEHP and the two secondary metabolites as compared with concentrations measured closer to the time of exposure. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (2010) 20, 38-53; doi:10.1038/jes.2008.74; published online 7 January 2009