Hydroxylated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as biomarkers of exposure in workers of aluminum production

Introduction. The relevance of the study is due to the impact of highly toxic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) on workers of aluminum production and the need of identification of relevant exposure biomarkers to assess the risk of damage to their health.

Materials and methods. The content of seven hydroxylated metabolites of PAHs (OH-PAH) in the urine in one hundred thirty workers from workshops with traditional (TSA) and modernized (TOA) technologies for aluminum production and 22 persons in the control group were studied using the author’s GC-MS method.

Results. High levels of OH-PAH were found in the urine in workers in workshops with TSA and TOA, exceeding the values of the control group by 1.7–120.7 and 1.2–12.4 times, respectively, and the limit of the biological exposure index by 2.0–28.0 and 1.2–2.9 times. Close correlations were established between the content of the standardized marker metabolite of PAHs, 1-OHPyr, and the levels of 2-OHFle (r = 0.860 and 0.869), 3-OHPhe (r = 0.902 and 0.932), and 2-OHNap (r = 0.433 and 0.412) dominant in the urine in workers in workshops with TSA and TOA.

Limitations. One potential limitation of this study is the difficulty in determining the levels of hydroxylated metabolites of high molecular weight (5,6-nuclear) PAHs in the urine in workers, which are primarily eliminated with fecal excretion.

Conclusion. The results of the conducted studies demonstrated that 2-OHNap, 2-OHFle and 3-OHPhe can be used as priority biomarkers of exposure to total PAHs for assessing the health risk of workers in addition to the generally accepted marker metabolite 1-OHPyr.

Compliance with ethical standards. The study was approved by the Local Ethics Committee of the Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution ESIMER and was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of research set out in the Helsinki declaration of the World Medical Association (2013 edition).

Contribution:
Shayakhmetov S.F. – concept and design of the study, organization of the study, search for literature sources, writing the text;
Zhurba O.M. – concept and design of the study, search for literature sources, search for literature sources, collection of material;
Alekseenko A.N. – laboratory research;
Merinov A.V. – collection of literature data, collection of material, statistical processing.
All authors are responsible for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript and approval of the manuscript final version.

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Funding. The work was performed within the framework of funds allocated for the implementation of the state task by East-Siberian Institute of Medical and Ecological Research.

Received: April 14, 2026 / Revised: June 4, 2026 / Accepted: July 1, 2026 / Published: October 20, 2026

1. Smola V.I. PAHs in the Environment: Problems and Solutions. Part 1 [PAU v okruzhayushchei srede: problemy i resheniya. Chast’ 1]. Moscow: Poligraf servis; 2013. (in Russian)

2. McGowin A.E. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. In: Chromatographic Analysis of the Environment. 3rd edition. CRC Press; 2006: 555–616.

3. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Some Non-Heterocyclic Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Some Related Exposures. Lyon; 2010.

4. Ifegwu O.C., Anyakora C. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: Part I. Exposure. Adv. Clin. Chem. 2015; 72: 277–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acc.2015.08.001 https://elibrary.ru/ydvbgk

5. Yang L., Zhang H., Zhang X., Xing W., Wang Y., Bai P., et al. Exposure to atmospheric particulate matter-bound polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and their health effects: a review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021; 18(4): 2177. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18042177 https://elibrary.ru/lvgibi

6. Abdel-Shafy H.I., Mansour M.S.M. A review on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: Source, environmental impact, effect on human health and remediation. Egypt. J. Pet. 2016; 25(1): 107–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2015.03.011 https://elibrary.ru/yejdki

7. Shayakhmetov S.F., Rukavishnikov V.S., Marinaite I.I., Merinov A.V. Content of polyarenes in the air of the working area at aluminum production. Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2025; 104(4): 492–6. https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2025-104-4-492-496 https://elibrary.ru/niqvwd (in Russian)

8. Zhao C., Guan X., Zhang Q., Meng L., Lin W., Yang R., et al. Parent and halogenated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons exposure in aluminum smelter workers: Serum levels, accumulation trends, and association with health indicators. Sci. Total Environ. 2024; 913: 169655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.169655 https://elibrary.ru/qiterd

9. Plotnikova O.A., Melnikov G.V., Tikhomirova E.I. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: characteristics, sources, standardization, spectroscopic determination methods (review). Teoreticheskaya i prikladnaya ekologiya. 2021; (4): 12–9. https://doi.org/10.25750/1995-4301-2021-4-012-019 https://elibrary.ru/gyuujm (in Russian)

10. Jongeneelen F. Guidelines for biological monitoring of workers in aluminium production facilities for urinary 1-hydroxypyrene (1-pyrenol). J. Environ. Monit. 2004; 6(5): 61N–5N. https://doi.org/10.1039/b312767m https://elibrary.ru/ebucaz

11. Klöslová Z., Drímal M., Balog K., Koppová K., Dubajová J. The relations between polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons exposure and 1-OHP levels as a biomarker of the exposure. Cent. Eur. J. Public Health. 2016; 24(4): 302–7. https://doi.org/10.21101/cejph.a4179

12. Zhang Y., Ding J., Shen G., Zhong J., Wang C., Wei S., et al. Dietary and inhalation exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and urinary excretion of monohydroxy metabolites – a controlled case study in Beijing, China. Environ. Pollut. 2014; 184: 515–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.10.005

13. TLVs and BEIs: Based on the documentation of the threshold limit values for chemical substances and physical agents and biological exposure indices. Cincinnati; 2020.

14. Campo L., Rossella F., Pavanello S., Mielzynska D., Siwinska E., Kapka L., et al. Urinary profiles to assess polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons exposure in coke-oven workers. Toxicol. Lett. 2010; 192(1): 72–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2008.12.018

15. Barbeau D., Persoons R., Marques M., Hervé C., Laffitte-Rigaud G., Maitre A. Relevance of urinary 3-hydroxybenzo(a)pyrene and 1-hydroxypyrene to assess exposure to carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon mixtures in metallurgy workers. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2014; 58(5): 579–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/meu004

16. Hadrup N., Mielżyńska-Švach D., Kozłowska A., Campisi M., Pavanello S., Vogel U. Association between a urinary biomarker for exposure to PAH and blood level of the acute phase protein serum amyloid A in coke oven workers. Environ. Health. 2019; 18(1): 81. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-019-0523-1 https://elibrary.ru/qsnkuw

17. Adetona O., Simpson C.D., Li Z., Sjodin A., Calafat A.M., Naeher L.P. Hydroxylated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as biomarkers of exposure to wood smoke in wildland firefighters. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2017; 27(1): 78–83. https://doi.org/10.1038/jes.2015.75

18. Fostinelli J., Madeo E., Toraldo E., Sarnico M., Luzzana G., Tomasi C., et al. Environmental and biological monitoring of occupational exposure to polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons during highway pavement construction in Italy. Toxicol. Lett. 2018, 298: 134–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2018.06.005

19. Shayakhmetov S.F., Alekseenko A.N., Merinov A.V., Zhurba O.M. Identification and characterization of 1-hydroxypyrene contents in urine as a marker of exposure to PAH in workers of electrolysis workshops at aluminum production. Health Risk Analysis. 2022; (3): 90–7. https://doi.org/10.21668/health.risk/2022.3.08.eng https://elibrary.ru/paiyzt

20. Alekseenko A.N., Zhurba O.M., Merinov A.V., Shayakhmetov S.F. Determination of hydroxylated polyaromatic hydrocarbons in urine by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry using dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and injector-port derivatization. J. Anal. Chem. 2024; 79(10): 1491–9. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1061934824700886 https://elibrary.ru/nzlmji

21. Shilov V.V., Markova O.L., Kuznetsov A.V. Biomonitoring of influence of harmful chemicals on the basis of the modern biomarkers. Literature review. Gigiena i Sanitaria (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal). 2019; 98(6): 591–6. https://elibrary.ru/qlaqms (in Russian)

22. Zaitseva N.V., Zemlyanova M.A., Chashchin V.P., Gudkov A.B. Scientific principles of use of biomarkers in medico-ecological studies (review). Ekologiya cheloveka. 2019; (9): 4–14. https://doi.org/10.33396/1728-0869-2019-9-4-14 https://elibrary.ru/wswnqj (in Russian)

23. Tuček M., Bencko V., Volný J., Petanová J. A contribution to the health risk assessment of exposure to exhaust gases in custom officers at border crossing. Čes. Prac. Lék. 2006; 7(2): 76–83. (in Czech)