Consecutive outbreaks of acute aflatoxicosis in Kenya in 2004 and 2005 caused > 150 deaths. In response, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization convened a workgroup of international experts and health officials in Geneva, Switzerland, in July 2005. After discussions concerning what is known about aflatoxins, the workgroup identified gaps in current knowledge about acute and chronic human health effects of aflatoxins, surveillance and food monitoring, analytic methods, and the efficacy of intervention strategies. The workgroup also identified public health strategies that could be integrated with current agricultural approaches to resolve gaps in current knowledge and ultimately reduce morbidity and mortality associated with the consumption of aflatoxin-contaminated food in the developing world. Four issues that warrant immediate attention were identified: a) quantify the human health impacts and the burden of disease due to aflatoxin exposure; b) compile an inventory, evaluate the efficacy, and disseminate results of ongoing intervention strategies; c) develop and augment the disease surveillance, food monitoring, laboratory, and public health response capacity of affected regions; and d) develop a response protocol that can be used in the event of an outbreak of acute aflatoxicosis. This report expands on the workgroup’s discussions concerning aflatoxin in developing countries and summarizes the findings.

Objectives: During January–June 2004, an aflatoxicosis outbreak in eastern Kenya resulted in 317 cases and 125 deaths. We conducted a case–control study to identify risk factors for contamination of implicated maize and, for the first time, quantitated biomarkers associated with acute aflatoxicosis.Design: We administered questionnaires regarding maize storage and consumption and obtained maize and blood samples from participants.Participants: We recruited 40 case-patients with aflatoxicosis and 80 randomly selected controls to participate in this study.Evaluations/Measurements: We analyzed maize for total aflatoxins and serum for aflatoxin B1–lysine albumin adducts and hepatitis B surface antigen. We used regression and survival analyses to explore the relationship between aflatoxins, maize consumption, hepatitis B surface antigen, and case status.Results: Homegrown (not commercial) maize kernels from case households had higher concentrations of aflatoxins than did kernels from control households [geometric mean (GM) = 354.53 ppb vs. 44.14 ppb; p = 0.04]. Serum adduct concentrations were associated with time from jaundice to death [adjusted hazard ratio = 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04–1.6]. Case patients had positive hepatitis B titers [odds ratio (OR) = 9.8; 95% CI, 1.5–63.1] more often than controls. Case patients stored wet maize (OR = 3.5; 95% CI, 1.2–10.3) inside their homes (OR = 12.0; 95% CI, 1.5–95.7) rather than in granaries more often than did controls.Conclusion: Aflatoxin concentrations in maize, serum aflatoxin B1–lysine adduct concentrations, and positive hepatitis B surface antigen titers were all associated with case status.Relevance: The novel methods and risk factors described may help health officials prevent future outbreaks of aflatoxicosis.

Essential to the conduct of epidemiologic studies examining aflatoxin exposure and the risk of heptocellular carcinoma, impaired growth, and acute toxicity has been the development of quantitative biomarkers of exposure to aflatoxins, particularly aflatoxin B 1 . In this study, identical serum sample sets were analyzed for aflatoxin-albumin adducts by ELISA, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with fluorescence detection (HPLC-f), and HPLC with isotope dilution mass spectrometry (IDMS). The human samples analyzed were from an acute aflatoxicosis outbreak in Kenya in 2004 (n = 102) and the measured values ranged from 0.018 to 67.0, nondetectable to 13.6, and 0.002 to 17.7 ng/mg albumin for the respective methods. The Deming regression slopes for the HPLC-f and ELISA concentrations as a function of the IDMS concentrations were 0.71 (r 2 = 0.95) and 3.3 (r 2 = 0.96), respectively. When the samples were classified as cases or controls, based on clinical diagnosis, all methods were predictive of outcome (P < 0.01). Further, to evaluate assay precision, duplicate samples were prepared at three levels by dilution of an exposed human sample and were analyzed on three separate days. Excluding one assay value by ELISA and one assay by HPLC-f, the overall relative SD were 8.7%, 10.5%, and 9.4% for IDMS, HPLC-f, and ELISA, respectively. IDMS was the most sensitive technique and HPLC-f was the least sensitive method. Overall, this study shows an excellent correlation between three independent methodologies conducted in different laboratories and supports the validation of these technologies for assessment of human exposure to this environmental toxin and carcinogen. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17(7):1653 -7)