Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
We read with interest the comments (Vogel et al. 2023) regarding the arguments to justify a higher OEL for zinc oxide (ZnO), and hereby, we would like to provide clarifications from a toxicological perspective.
In general, the authors emphasize that chronic acute phase protein elevations, such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and serum amyloid A (SAA), increase the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and that even small elevations are relevant. We disagree. CRP and SAA are useful biomarkers of inflammation, but evidence on their causal role in CVD is still lacking—despite strong scientific effort and hundreds of studies.
A recent review casts doubt that there is a causal link between CRP elevations and CVD at all. Liu and Li (2023) conclude: “Our examination of available studies suggests that CRP is unlikely to be a cause of CVDs. The widely observed associations between CRP and CVDs are more likely to be explained by confounding in observational studies and by treatments in clinical trials.”
The same is true for SAA. In a comprehensive actual review of den Hartigh and coworkers argue: “Elevations of SAA subtypes have been consistently associated with metabolic diseases such as obesity, diabetes, CVD, and autoimmune conditions in humans and in animal models. After 40 years of investigation, evidence is not yet sufficient to determine whether SAA plays causal roles in metabolic disease development and progression, or is merely a biomarker of broader phenomena akin to CRP.” (den Hartigh et al. 2023).
Zinc-specific mechanism of action: We did not define the causal mechanism of action clearly. In our considerations, we focused on the comparison of chemically inert particles with zinc oxide particles (see BaSO4 study, Monsé et al. 2022) and attributed the observable systemic inflammation to zinc ions. We agree that other metal oxides can also cause similar effects. Therefore, the term “zinc-specific mechanism of action” should be understood as “metal-specific mechanism of action”.
The authors cite studies showing that insoluble particles should trigger acute phase protein responses. In an experimental human study, Wyatt and coworkers (2020) exposed 20 volunteers to particles (PM 2.5, 37.8 µg/m3) collected from the outdoor environment and observed a small increase of SAA. The problem is that the composition of the particle load was not further investigated. Environmental particles are normally very complex mixtures of a broad variety of components containing soluble and insoluble substances. Therefore, the observations cannot be assigned to a substance-specific mechanism (here: mechanism of action of insoluble particles). However, for a singular chemically inert substance such as barium sulfate, we clearly demonstrated that short-term exposure of humans to much higher concentrations (4000 µg/m3) did not induce any systemic inflammation.
The cited study by Zhang et al. (2017) has the same disadvantage. Correlations of elevated CRP with PM 2.5 concentrations were investigated and can therefore not be attributed to a specific insoluble component or insoluble components at all.
In the last section of the text, the MAK recommendation was misrepresented. This is 0.1 mg/m3 for zinc and not ZnO. The Danish proposal for the occupational exposure limit is given in the text as 0.05 mg/m3 ZnO. This presentation could be confusing and should be given as 0.04 mg/m3 Zn. The authors conclude that the MAK proposal and the Danish proposal are very similar. Compliance with the concentration level proposed by Vogel et al. would lead to very serious technical problems for the companies concerned and would virtually constitute a ban on work. Even the MAK limit value proposal of 0.1 µg/m3 Zn cannot yet be sufficiently complied with by many companies (see Poppe et al. 2019). We, therefore, see the difference between the two proposals as relevant.
References
den Hartigh LJ, May KS, Zhang X-S, Chait A, Blaser M (2023) Serum amyloid A and metabolic disease: evidence for a critical role in chronic inflammatory conditions. Front Cardiovasc Med 10:1197432. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2023.1197432
Liu C, Li C (2023) C-reactive protein and cardiovascular diseases: a synthesis of studies based on different designs. Eur J Prev Cardiol. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwad116
Monsé C, Westphal G, Raulf M, Jettkant B, van Kampen V, Kendzia B, Schürmeyer L, Seifert CE, Marek E-M, Wiegand F, Wegener C, Rosenkranz N, Merget R, Brüning T, Bünger J (2022) No inflammatory effects after acute inhalation of barium sulfate particles in human volunteers. BMC Pulm Med 22:233
Poppe M, Heinl D, Voßberg A, Monsé C, Gabriel S (2019) Feuerverzinken—Ermittlung und Beurteilung von Gefahrstofexpositionen. Gefahrst Reinhalt Luft 80:47–52
Vogel U, Saber AT, Jacobsen NR, Danielsen PH, Hougaard KS, Hadrup N (2023) Re-evaluation of the occupational exposure limit for ZnO is warranted. Comments on ‘Systemic inflammatory effects of zinc oxide particles: is a re-evaluation of exposure limits needed?’ by Christian Monsè et al. Arch Toxicol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-023-03634-w
Wyatt LH, Devlin RB, Rappold AG, Case MW, Diaz-Sanchez D (2020) Low levels of fine particulate matter increase vascular damage and reduce pulmonary function in young healthy adults. Part Fibre Toxicol 17(1):58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12989-020-00389-5
Zhang Z, Chang LY, Lau AKH et al (2017) Satellite-based estimates of long-term exposure to fine particulate matter are associated with C-reactive protein in 30 034 Taiwanese adults. Int J Epidemiol 46(4):1126–1136
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Monsé, C., Merget, R., Pallapies, D. et al. Reply on the comments of Ulla Vogel and colleagues on their recently published paper entitled “Re-evaluation of the occupational exposure limit for ZnO is warranted. Comments on ‘Systemic inflammatory effects of zinc oxide particles: is a re-evaluation of exposure limits needed?’ by Christian Monsé et al.”. Arch Toxicol 98, 1023–1024 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-023-03668-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-023-03668-0