联系我们
Isaac Scientific Publishing
Environmental Pollution and Protection
EPP > Volume 5, Number 1, March 2020

A Critical Review of Criteria Used For the Selection of Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in Different Environmental Matrices

Download PDF  (697.2 KB)PP. 5-18,  Pub. Date:March 9, 2020
DOI: 10.22606/epp.2020.51002

Author(s)
Jessica Rodrigues Pires da Silva, Cristiano Piacsek Borges, Fabiana Valéria da Fonseca
Affiliation(s)
Alberto Luiz Coimbra Institute of Posgraduation and Research in Engineering (COPPE), Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Alberto Luiz Coimbra Institute of Posgraduation and Research in Engineering (COPPE), Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
School of Chemistry. Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Abstract
Pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) are increasingly gaining attention in the context of emerging pollutants, and therefore deserve particular attention regarding criteria for their consideration in scientific research. This article presents a review of these criteria, concluding that one of the most common is selecting PPCPs that have already been previously cited in literature. This can create a biased selection because it ignores the possibility that additional, but previously unreported compounds that may also play important roles from an environmental point of view. There is an impending necessity to broaden representativeness of PPCPs in studies before they start to be regulated. Some recommendations for that were presented, the main one being to cross data from PPCPs most consumed by the population with the frequency of citing of these PPCPs in scientific databases, giving priority in research to compounds positioned as of high consumption but with low number of citations in environmental studies. Such efforts will require big data analyzes.
Keywords
environment, pharmaceuticals, prioritization, selection, water, wastewater.
References
  • [1]  Y. Tian and I. Chowdhury, “Adsorption of Selected Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Products with Molybdenum Disulfide and Tungsten Disulfide Nanomaterials”, Environ. Eng. Sci. 2019 vol. 36 number 3
  • [2]  World Health Organization, Available https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2011/ pharmaceuticals_20110601.pdf(2)
  • [3]  Y. Luo, W. Guo, H. H. Ngo, L.D. Nghiem, F.I.Hai, J. Zhang, S. Liang, X.C. Wang, “A review on the occurrence of micropollutants in the aquatic environment and their fate and removal during wastewater treatment”, Sci. Total Environ 2014; 473–474 619–641
  • [4]  P. Falas, A.Wick, S. Castronovo, J. Habermacher, T.A. Ternes, A. Joss, “Tracing the limits of organic micropollutant removal in biological wastewater treatment”, Water Res 2016; 95:240–9
  • [5]  E. Gracia-Lor, J.V. Sancho, R. Serrano, F. Hernández, “Occurrence and removal of pharmaceuticals in wastewater treatment plants at the Spanish Mediterranean area of Valencia” Chemosphere 2012; volume 87, Issue 5 Pages 453–462
  • [6]  A. Novo, S. André, P. Viana, O.C. Nunes, C.M. Manaia, “Antibiotic resistance, antimicrobial residues and bacterial community composition in urban wastewater”, Water Res 2013; Volume 47, Issue 5, Pages 1875-1887
  • [7]  J.J.S. Alonso, N.E. Kori, N. Martel-Melián, B. Del Río-Gamero, “Removal of ciprofloxacin from seawater by reverse osmosis”, J Environ Manage 2018; 217- Pages 337-345
  • [8]  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Available https://www.epa.gov/ccl/contaminant-candidate-list-4-ccl-4-0
  • [9]  European Comission (EC), Available http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-dangersub/pdf/ strategic_approach_pharmaceuticals_env.PDF
  • [10]  European Comission (EC), Available http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/ priority_substances.htm
  • [11]  F. Regan, L. Jones, J. Chapman, “Monitoring of Priority Substances in Waste Water Effluents”. 2019 EPA 2019.
  • [12]  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Available https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/ documents/method_1694_2007.pdf
  • [13]  R. Hochstrat, M. Schärer, H. Bleny, “Elimination of micropollutants – the Swiss approach”. 2015. TAPES 2019.
  • [14]  M. Al Aukidy, P. Verlicchi, N. Voulvoulis, “A framework for the assessment of the environmental risk posed by pharmaceuticals originating from hospital effluents”. Sci Total Environ 2014; 493, 54–64
  • [15]  J. Jean, Y. Perrodin, C. Pivot, D. Trepo, M. Perraud, J. Droguet, F. Tissot-Guerraz, F. Locher, “Identification and prioritization of bioaccumulable pharmaceutical substances discharged in hospital effluents”. J Environ Manage 2012; 103, 113–121
  • [16]  P Voogt, M.L. Janex-Habibi, F. Sacher, L. Puijker, M. Mons, “Development of a common priority list of pharmaceuticals relevant for the water cycle”, Water Sci Technol. 2009;59(1):39–46.
  • [17]  A.L. Pochodylo and D.E. Helbling, “Emerging investigators series: prioritization of suspect hits in a sensitive suspect screening workflow for comprehensive micropollutant characterization in environmental samples”, Environ. Sci.: Water Res. Technol., 2017, vol 3, 54-65
  • [18]  W. Busch, S. Schmidt, R. Kühne, T. Schulze, M. Krauss, R. Altenburg, “Micropollutants in European rivers: A mode of action survey to support the development of effect-based tools for water monitoring”, Environ Toxicol Chem. 2016 Aug;35(8):1887-99.
  • [19]  P. Carsten von der Ohe, V. Dulio, J. Slobodnik, E. De Deckere, R. Kuhne, R. Ebert, A. Ginebreda, W. De Cooman, G. Schuurmann, W. Brack, “A new risk assessment approach for the prioritization of 500 classical and emerging organic microcontaminants as potential river basin specific pollutants under the European Water Framework Directive”, Sci Total Environ 2011; 409: 2064–2077
  • [20]  M. Oosterhuis, F. Sacher, T.L. Laak, “Prediction of concentration levels of metformin and other high consumption pharmaceuticals in wastewater and regional surface water based on sales data”, Sci Total Environ 2013; Volume 442, Pages 380-388
  • [21]  B.G. Katzung BG. Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. Koogan, 2009.
  • [22]  V. Karelid, G. Larsson, B. Bjorlenius, “Pilot-scale removal of pharmaceuticals in municipal wastewater: Comparison of granular and powdered activated carbon treatment at three wastewater treatment plants”, J Environ Manage 2017; Volume 193 Pages 491-502
  • [23]  A.M. Urtiaga, G. Pérez, R. Ibañez, I. Ortiz, “Removal of pharmaceuticals from a WWTP secondary effluent by ultrafiltration/reverse osmosis followed by electrochemical oxidation of the RO concentrate”, Desalination 2013; 331: 26–34
  • [24]  C.G. Daughton, “The Matthew Effect and widely prescribed pharmaceuticals lacking environmental monitoring: Case study of an exposure-assessment vulnerability”, Sci Total Environ 2014; 466–467 : 315–325
  • [25]  C.G. Daughton and I.S. Ruhoy, “Lower-dose prescribing: Minimizing “side effects” of pharmaceuticals on society and the environment”, Sci Total Environ 443 (2013) 324–337
  • [26]  T.S. Oliveira, M. Murphy, N. Mendola, V. Wong, D. Carlson, L. Waring, “Characterization of Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care products in hospital effluent and waste water influent/effluent by direct-injection LC-MS-MS” Sci Total Environ 2015; 518–519 : 459–478
  • [27]  T. Ternes and U. von Gunten, Editorial to special issue in Water Research: emerging contaminants in water. Water Res 2010; 44:351.
  • [28]  M. Alexander, “Nonbiodegradable and other racalcitrant molecules”. Microbial Ecology. 1975 Vol. 2, No. 1 pp. 17-27
  • [29]  P.R. Dugan. Biochemical Ecology of Water Pollution. Plenum Press, 1972.
  • [30]  D. Ghosal, S. Ghosh, T.K. Dutta, Y. Ahn, “Current State of Knowledge in Microbial Degradation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs): A Review”, Front Microbiol. 2016 Aug 31;7:1369
Copyright © 2020 Isaac Scientific Publishing Co. All rights reserved.