VOC sampling locations table for Ground Zero area, Jan 2002

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

Table 9. Experiment A; Body Weights, Baseline PenH, and Responsiveness to Methacholine Aerosol Group B.Wt. d 0 B.Wt. d 1 Baseline Dose Meh fmg/mn and PenH AUC (PenH - sec) (g) JsL PenH 0 4 8 16 32 64 Saline 24.78 23.30 0.97 0.5 39.1 54.0 142.3 309.0 1249.9 0.42 0.65 0.13 0.5 8.4 8.9 28.5 30.6 360.7 MSH-100 24.82 23.80 1.10 2.4 36.4 99.2 177.9 437.9 1173J 0.51 0.45 0.12 0.3 5.5 22.5 23.7 54.3 358.3 ROFA-10 24.99 24.55 0.81 15.5 42.4 114.6 205.5 432.4 1182.5 0.43 0.45 0.10 3.2 8.9 11.3 56.1 88.5 294.2 ROFA-100 24.86 24.60 0.91 6.1 36.7 118.2 242.1 642.2 2190.9 0.44 0.45 0.11 6.3 4.1 34.1 37.2 94.0 706.4 WTCX-10 24.96 24.44 0.92 18.5 43.9 88.3 169.1 281.1 968.4 0.38 0.28 0.11 6.4 11.6 16.2 52.3 35.5 129.9 WTCX-31.6 24.56 23.73 0.85 15.3 38.3 55.2 114.4 249.2 923.3 0.46 0.51 0.11 3.4 4.8 8.8 7.0 39.8 174.2 WTCX-100 24.68 24.14 1.04 9.5 67.4 208.3 397J 2265.0 4009.1 0.44 0.42 0.12 8.2 11.3 47.6 61.4 260.7 580.1 “ Values shown are means (in bold) and SEM immediately below means (n=8 per group). Body weight (B. Wt.) was measured in the morning (no significant differences were found). No significant differences were found in baseline PenH (enhanced pause; unitless) on day 1. Methacholine aerosol (Meh) was then administered (see Methods for details) at the indicated doses, and the airway response was calculated as the area under the curve (AUC) of the PenH response over time in seconds. See Figure 8 for description of statistical analysis of PenH AUC data.

and enzymes were found in any of the other PM exposure as well as an individual line would fit the group-specific groups relative to saline controls. In general, the data. The responses to saline or individual doses of Meh inflammatory response in the WTCX-100 group can be aerosol are not as important as the fitted line describing considered to be quite mild considering the fairly high the groups. Among these 5 groups, ROFA-10 mice had a dose. small but significant increase in the coefficient of the 4. Responsiveness to methacholine aeirosol. In sub­ equation vs. the Saline group (P = 0.03). The ROFA-100 experiments A3 and A4, the same groups of mice were and WTCX-100 groups could be modeled with a power exposed and the same time points were examined as function with a significantly different exponent (1.471; P described for sub-experiments Al, A2, and A5, but = 0.001) vs. the common exponent of the other 5 groups, different endpoints were examined. There were no indicating that these 2 groups are hyperresponsive differences in body weights on day 0 or day 1 among the compared with the other 5 groups. In addition, the 7 groups of mice (Table 9). On day 1, there was no coefficient for the WTCX-100 group was significantly difference in baseline PenH values (immed iately before different fi-om and greater than that of the ROFA-100 Meh aerosol) among the 7 groups. Responsiveness to group (P=0.0001), showing that mice exposed to the 100 increasing concentrations ofMeh aerosol was assessed and pg dose of WTCX were more reactive to Meh than the quantified by integrating the area under the PenH - time ROFA-100 group. curve (PenH AUC; Table 9). In order to assess overall 5. Lung histopathology. Following tests for airway responsiveness and account for variability, power function responsiveness to Meh aerosol, mice from sub­ equations were fit to the PenH AUC vs. [Meh] data for experiments A3 and A4 were killed and assessed for each group (Figure 8). The analysis showed that the pathological changes in the lungs. No remarkable findings Saline, MSH, ROFA-10, WTCX-10, and WTCX-31.6 were observed in the lungs of the saline control group groups could all be modeled with a common power (Table 10). In both the MSH-100 and ROFA-100 groups, function exponent (1.157). It is important to note that focal subacute bronchiolar inflammation was found at once the lines were determined to come from groups with similar incidences and average severity, which was a common exponent, the lines for these 5 groups were fit minimal (average score: MSH-100 = 0.8; ROFA-100 = simultaneously, resulting in fitted equations tliat did not fit 1.0). The ROFA-10 group had a lower average severity

22

NYC-WTC_000149165