The harmony and dissonance of harmonization: a comparison of four Globally Harmonized System (GHS) carcinogen categorizations with NTP, US EPA, and IARC classifications

Details

• Personal Author:
  Whittaker C
• Description:
  The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) was developed to harmonize classifying and labeling of chemicals internationally. GHS was developed through the cooperation of the International Labour Organization, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and the United Nations Sub-Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. The intent was a harmonization of the categorization process, not necessarily a harmonization of the categorization result, leaving the door open for organizations to interpret and apply the data differently. This study compared the carcinogen categorizations by four organizations that have compiled GHS categorizations (the European Union (CLP Annex VI), Safe Work Australia, Japan METI, and German IFA (GESTIS)) for 100 chemical substances. These GHS categories were compared to NTP, EPA and IARC carcinogen classifications. Overall there was broad agreement on carcinogenicity, but out of 100 substances, there were disagreements among the four GHS categorization compilations for 41 substances. Of the 28 substances that at least one of the carcinogen classification agencies (NTP, EPA and IARC) ranked as known human carcinogens (or equivalent), 14 were categorized by the GHS-ranking agencies as a GHS carcinogen category 1B or 2 (presumed or suspected carcinogen). Of the 69 substances that at least one of the NTP, EPA or IARC classified as possible or probable carcinogen (or equivalent), 14 of the substances were classified by at least one of the GHS-ranking agencies as not classifiable or insufficient data. This analysis demonstrates that the harmonization of process does not always lead to harmonization of decision. Understanding the advantages and pitfalls of carcinogen classification is important for interpretation of hazards. [Description provided by NIOSH]
• Subjects:
  Carcinogens Decision Making Occupational Health Safety Toxicology
• Keywords:
  Carcinogenicity Decision-making Health-standards Information-systems Standards
• ISSN:
  1096-6080
• Document Type:
  Text
• Genre:
  Abstract or Summary
• Place as Subject:
  California ; Ohio ; OSHA Region 5 ; OSHA Region 9
• CIO:
  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
• Division:
  EID - Education and Information Division
• Topic:
  Workplace Safety & Health
• Location:
  North America
• Volume:
  144
• Issue:
  1
• NIOSHTIC Number:
  nn:20045881
• Citation:
  Toxicologist 2015 Mar; 144(1):412
• Federal Fiscal Year:
  2015
• Peer Reviewed:
  False
• Source Full Name:
  The Toxicologist. Society of Toxicology 54th Annual Meeting and ToxExpo, March 22-26, 2015, San Diego, California
• Collection(s):
  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:95b48584302862983c7afaa4fde0555a841e942d2e991cbb6d00f79cb22f0c934f4ad1e5c132e9b9e8d3510b343aee5a60b5595fcdcd6920d7a40168f605195e
• Download URL:
  https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/201130/cdc_201130_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 210.27 KB ]