The authors performed a cross-sectional study to evaluate associations between blood lead, tibia lead, and dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA)-chelatable lead and measures of neurobehavioral and peripheral nervous system function among 803 lead-exposed workers and 135 unexposed controls in South Korea. The workers and controls were enrolled in the study between October 1997 and August 1999. Central nervous system function was assessed with a modified version of the World Health Organization Neurobehavioral Core Test Battery. Peripheral nervous system function was assessed by measuring pinch and grip strength and peripheral vibration thresholds. After adjustment for covariates, the signs of the beta coefficients for blood lead were negative for 16 of the 19 tests and blood lead was a significant predictor of worse performance on eight tests. On average, for the eight tests that were significantly associated with blood lead levels, an increase in blood lead of 5 microg/dl was equivalent to an increase of 1.05 years in age. In contrast, after adjustment for covariates, tibia lead level was not associated with neurobehavioral test scores. Associations with DMSA-chelatable lead were similar to those for blood lead. In these currently exposed workers, blood lead was a better predictor of neurobehavioral performance than was tibia or DMSA-chelatable lead, mainly in the domains of executive abilities, manual dexterity, and peripheral motor strength.
A cross-sectional study was performed to evaluate the influence of polymorphisms in the [delta]-aminolevulinic acid dehydratase (ALAD) and vitamin D receptor (VDR) genes on blood lead, tibia lead, and dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA)-chelatable lead levels in 798 lead workers and 135 controls without occupational lead exposure in the Republic of Korea. Tibia lead was assessed with a 30-min measurement by (109)Cd-induced K-shell X-ray fluorescence, and DMSA-chelatable lead was estimated as 4-hr urinary lead excretion after oral administration of 10 mg/kg DMSA. The primary goals of the analysis were to examine blood lead, tibia lead, and DMSA-chelatable lead levels by ALAD and VDR genotypes, controlling for covariates; and to evaluate whether ALAD and VDR genotype modified relations among the different lead biomarkers. There was a wide range of blood lead (4-86 microg/dL), tibia lead (-7-338 microg Pb/g bone mineral), and DMSA-chelatable lead (4.8-2,103 microg) levels among lead workers. Among lead workers, 9.9% (n = 79) were heterozygous for the ALAD(2) allele and there were no homozygotes. For VDR, 10.7% (n = 85) had the Bb genotype, and 0.5% (n = 4) had the BB genotype. Although the ALAD and VDR genes are located on different chromosomes, lead workers homozygous for the ALAD(1) allele were much less likely to have the VDR bb genotype (crude odds ratio = 0.29, 95% exact confidence interval = 0.06-0.91). In adjusted analyses, subjects with the ALAD(2) allele had higher blood lead levels (on average, 2.9 microg/dL, p = 0.07) but no difference in tibia lead levels compared with subjects without the allele. In adjusted analyses, lead workers with the VDR B allele had significantly (p < 0.05) higher blood lead levels (on average, 4.2 microg/dL), chelatable lead levels (on average, 37.3 microg), and tibia lead levels (on average, 6.4 microg/g) than did workers with the VDR bb genotype. The current data confirm past observations that the ALAD gene modifies the toxicokinetics of lead and also provides new evidence that the VDR gene does so as well.
Evidence suggests that lead and selected genes known to modify the toxicokinetics of lead--namely, those for the vitamin D receptor (VDR) and delta-aminolevulinic acid dehydratase (ALAD)--may independently influence blood pressure and hypertension risk. We report the relations among ALAD and VDR genotypes, three lead dose measures, and blood pressure and hypertension status in 798 Korean lead workers and 135 controls without occupational exposure to lead. Lead dose was assessed by blood lead, tibia lead measured by X-ray fluorescence, and dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA)-chelatable lead. Among lead workers, 9.9% (n = 79) were heterozygous for the ALAD(2) allele, and there were no ALAD(2) homozygotes; 11.2% (n = 89) had at least one copy of the VDR B allele, and 0.5% (n = 4) had the BB genotype. In linear regression models to control for covariates, VDR genotype (BB and Bb vs. bb), blood lead, tibia lead, and DMSA-chelatable lead were all positive predictors of systolic blood pressure. On average, lead workers with the VDR B allele, mainly heterozygotes, had systolic blood pressures that were 2.7-3.7 mm Hg higher than did workers with the bb genotype. VDR genotype was also associated with diastolic blood pressure; on average, lead workers with the VDR B allele had diastolic blood pressures that were 1.9-2.5 mm Hg higher than did lead workers with the VDR bb genotype (p = 0.04). VDR genotype modified the relation of age with systolic blood pressure; compared to lead workers with the VDR bb genotype, workers with the VDR B allele had larger elevations in blood pressure with increasing age. Lead workers with the VDR B allele also had a higher prevalence of hypertension compared to lead workers with the bb genotype [adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) = 2.1 (1.0, 4.4), p = 0.05]. None of the lead biomarkers was associated with diastolic blood pressure, and tibia lead was the only lead dose measure that was a significant predictor of hypertension status. In contrast to VDR, ALAD genotype was not associated with the blood pressure measures and did not modify associations of the lead dose measures with any of the blood pressure measures. To our knowledge, these are the first data to suggest that the common genetic polymorphism in the VDR is associated with blood pressure and hypertension risk. We speculate that the BsmI polymorphism may be in linkage disequilibrium with another functional variant at the VDR locus or with a nearby gene.
In this study, measurement of patella lead did not aid causal inference regarding cognitive effects when compared with blood lead and tibia lead.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.