The use of human biomonitoring to assess the industrial impact of medicines

The paper presents data on the use of human biomonitoring methodology to assess the effects of medicines on the body of pharmaceutical and healthcare workers in various countries. The authors have conducted a search and analysis of relevant scientific literature in the scientometric databases Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, RSCI, Cyberleninka, regulatory documents in the ConsultantPlus legal reference system and foreign registers of relevant departments.

Data are presented on the contamination of surfaces in production workshops, pharmacy premises, wards, procedure rooms, pharmaceutical isolators, and compounding units in healthcare facilities with antitumor drugs: cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, megestrol, bicamitacide, capecitabine, and etoposide in concentrations exceeding the maximum permissible concentration (MPC). Several studies demonstrated contamination with antibiotics such as piperacillin, amoxicillin, meropenem, benzylpenicillin, and vancomycin on surfaces and in the ambient air of procedure rooms and wards in various departments.

An analysis of the literature revealed that when conducting biomonitoring studies in medical workers of cancer hospitals, cyclophosphamide was detected in urine at the level of 0.05–0.99 mcg/l, ifosfamide at a concentration of 0.10–0.44 mcg/l, methotrexate 0.10–3.17 mcg/l, 5-fluorouracil 1.0–24.5 mcg/l. Qualitative analysis of blood plasma from medical personnel in more than 30% of samples identified various antitumor agents at the level of 0.1–1 ng/ml, including platinum‒containing (irinotecan) in the range of 92 pg/ml – 266 pg/ml and platinum in hair at the level of 3.24 (2.35–4.74)×10^–³ ng. A number of studies have shown the results of quantitative determination of narcotic and non-narcotic analgesics in the biological environment of pharmaceutical workers.

The presented data indicates the relevance of the introduction of biological control of the production environment with the establishment of biomarkers of exposure to priority drugs with toxic properties.

At this stage of the introduction of human biomonitoring in Russia, there are limitations associated with the imperfection and incompleteness of the regulatory framework, as well as the lack of systematic approaches in the selection of biological substrates, analytical methods for the determination of drugs in the biological environment of workers, and therefore the comparison of research results is difficult.

Contributions:
Lalymenko O.S. — research concept and design, collection, processing, analysis of material, writing of the manuscript text;
Korsun L.V. — text editing, responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the article.

Funding. The study had no funding.

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

Received: 23.03.2026 / Accepted: 31.03.2026 / Published: 02.06.2026

1. Savilov E.D., Anganova E.V., Ilina S.V.,Stepanenko L.A. Technogenic environmental pollution and the public health: analysis and prognosis. Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian Journal. 2016; 95(6): 507–12. https://elibrary.ru/whpwfn (in Russian)

2. Hanqing Xu, Yang Jia, Zhendong Sun, Jiahui su, Qian S. Liu, Qunfang Zhou, et al. Environmental pollution, a hidden culprit for health issues. Eco-Environment & Health. 2022; 1(1): 31–45 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eehl.2022.04.003

3. Ring C.L., Jon A Arnot, Bennett D.H., Peter P. Egeghy, Fantke P., Lei Huang. Consensus Modeling of Median Chemical Intake for the U.S. Population Based on Predictions of Exposure Pathways. Environ Sci Technol. 2018; 53(2): 719–32. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b04056

4. Lykov I.N. Pharmaceutical environmental pollution. Regional environmental issues. 2020; 3: 23–27. https://elibrary.ru/zfjjcd (in Russian).

5. Vasilkevich V.M., Bogdanov R.V., Drozdova E.V. Actual issues of hygienic regulation and creation of safe working conditions at pharmaceutical manufacturing enterprises. Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology [Med. truda i prom. ekol.]. 2020; 60(10): 640-4. https://doi.org/10.31089/1026-9428-2020-60-10-640-644 (in Russian).

6. Perova I., Lalymenko O., Zavgorodnii I., Reshetnik V., Miroshnychenko N. The definition of influence different drug exposure types to medical indicators of white rats. In: Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Data Stream Mining and Processing. DSMP. 2020: 268-71. https://doi.org/10.1109/DSMP47368.2020.9204116

7. Bukhtiyarov I.V. Current state and main directions of preservation and strengthening of health of the working population of Russia. Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology [Med. truda i prom. ekol.]. 2019; (9): 527-32 https://doi.org/10.31089/1026-9428-2019-59-9-527-532 (in Russian).

8. Bakhonina E.I., Matuzov G.L., Fazylova L.I., Khaybullina R.R. Working conditions and occupational diseases of pharmaceutical workers. Elektronnyy nauchnyy zhurnal Neftegazovoe delo. 2024; 3: 92–105. https://elibrary.ru/epaouw (in Russian).

9. Gorokhova L.G., Martynova N.A., Kizichenko N.V., Logunova T.D. Hygienic aspects of health status of the workers in chemical and pharmaceutical production. Medicine in Kuzbass. 2017; 16(3): 11–6. https://elibrary.ru/zgilyp (in Russian).

10. Yakovlev A.A. Faktory proizvodstvennoy deyatel'nosti, vliyayushchie na usloviya truda farmatsevticheskikh rabotnikov. In.: «Sbornik nauchnykh trudov II Vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy internet-konferentsii s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem». N. Novgorod; 2024: 168–172. https://elibrary.ru/xafzji (in Russian)

11. Shivani Khanna, Geeta Kumari, Hemant Bhanawat, Pandey K.M. Occupational Health and Safety of Workers in Pharmaceutical Industries. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering. 2019; 8(4): 311–6. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.D6819.118419

12. Lukovnikova L.V., Zatsepin E.P., Yatselenko Yu.V. Znachenie biomonitoringa dlya uluchsheniya diagnostiki khimicheskogo vozdeystviya i povysheniya kachestva zhizni naseleniya. V sb.: «Zdorov'e naseleniya i kachestvo zhizni: elektronnyy sbornik materialov IX Vserossiyskoy s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii». SPb.; 2022: 296–301. https://elibrary.ru/akmnud (in Russian).

13. Beygul N.A., Karimova L.K., Muldasheva N.A., Volgareva A.D., Shapoval I.V., Gimranova G.G. et al. Analiz gigienicheskoy situatsii na proizvodstve i kontrol' urovney zagryazneniya vozdushnoy sredy predpriyatiy khimicheskogo kompleksa. Tendentsii razvitiya nauki i obrazovaniya. 2024; 107(6): 85-89. https://elibrary.ru/zndqlc (in Russian).

14. Varun Ahuja, Mohan Krishnappa. Approaches for setting occupational exposure limits in the pharmaceutical industry. J. Appl. Toxicol. 2022; 42(1):154-67. https://doi.org/10.1002/jat.4218

15. Maharshi Mehta, Patricia McDonnell, Prasanth K. Applied occupational hygiene in pharmaceutical industries. Annals of Work Exposures and Health. 2024; 68(1): 1. https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxae035.272

16. Ukolov A.I., Radilov A.S. On the Development of Ideas for Biological Control of Occupational Exposure to Harmful Chemicals (discussion). Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology [Med. truda i prom. ekol.]. 2022; 62(11): 740–746. https://doi.org/10.31089/1026-9428-2022-62-11-740-746 https://elibrary.ru/edpulo (in Russian).

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

18. Reinyuk V.L., Lukovnikova L.V., Kozlov V.K., Yatselenko Yu.V., Pilnik E.N. On improving the diagnosis of chemical pathology based on biomonitoring. Medline.ru. Rossiyskiy biomeditsinskiy zhurnal. 2023; 24(1): 1033–48. https://elibrary.ru/jgvyku (in Russian)

19. Lukovnikova L.V., Barinov V.A., Reynyuk V.L., Yatselenko Yu.V. Razvitie metodologii biomonitoringa khimicheskikh veshchestv v issledovaniyakh otechestvennykh toksikologov. Meditsina truda: problemy sokhraneniya professional'nogo zdorov'ya v Rossii na rubezhe pervoy i vtoroy chetverti XXI veka. In: Sb. trudov vserossiyskoy nauchnoy konferentsii s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem, posvyashchennoy 100-letiyu so dnya osnovaniya kafedry meditsiny truda im. I.I. Mechnikova Minzdrava Rossii. SPb.; 2024: 171-5. https://elibrary.ru/gnszmx (in Russian)

20. Markova O.L., Shilov V.V., Kuznetsov A.V., Metelitsa N.D. Comparative assessment of approaches to human biomonitoring problem by national and foreign researchers (literature review). Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal. 2020; 99(6): 545–50. https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2020-99-6-545-550 (in Russian).

21. Human biomonitoring: facts and figures. Copnhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2015. https://clck.ru/3Tihgd

22. Maryam Zare Jedd, Nancy B. Hopf, Henriqueta Louro, Susana Viegas, Karen S. Galea, Robert Pasanen-Kase et al. Developing human biomonitoring as a 21st century toolbox within the European exposure science strategy 2020–2030. Environment International. 2022; 168: 107476: 2–21 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2022.107476

23. Nancy B. Hopf, Jos Bessems, Tiina Santonen, Susana Viegas, Ludwine Casteleyn, Devika Poddalgoda Introducing the OECD guidance document on occupational biomonitoring: A harmonized methodology for deriving occupational biomonitoring levels (OBL). Toxicology Letters. 2025; 403: 132–43 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2024.12.006

24. Zhaojin Cao, Shaobin Lin, Feng Zhao, Yuebin Lv, Yingli Qu, Xiaojian Hu et al. Cohort profile: China National Human Biomonitoring (CNHBM)-A nationally representative, prospective cohort in Chinese population. Environment International. 2021; 146: 106252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106252

25. Larionova T.K., Daukaev R.A., Zemlyanova M.A., Zaitseva N.V., Allayarova G.R., Zelenkovskaya E.E. et al. Use of Biological Monitoring to Assess Health Damage from Environmental Pollution with Metals. Public Health and Life Environment – PH&LE. 2023; 31(6): 44–53. https://doi.org/10.35627/2219-5238/2023-31-6-44-53 (in Russian).

26. Zaytseva N.V., Zemlyanova M.A. Assessment of violations of the proteomic profile in blood plasma in children being under inhalation exposure to fine dust containing vanadium. Health Risk Analysis. 2016; (1): 26–33. https://doi.org/10.21668/health.risk/2016.1.03 (in Russian).

27. Zaytseva N.V., Ulanova T.S., Sinitsyna O.O., Gileva O.V. Methodical ware for the hygienic risk assessment of vanadium exposure to the children’s health. Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal. 2014; 4: 115–9 (in Russian).

28. Lalymenko O.S. Methodical ware for the hygienic risk assessment of vanadium exposure to the children’s health. In: «Professiya i Zdorov'e. Materialy 1-ogo Mezhdunarodnogo Molodezhnogo Foruma». Moscow; 2016: 74-76. https://elibrary.ru/talsrj (in Russian)

29. Bocca B., Battistini B. Biomarkers of exposure and effect in human biomonitoring of metal-based nanomaterials: their use in primary prevention and health surveillance. Nanotoxicology. 2024; 18(1): 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2023.2301692

30. Shilov V.V., Markova O.L., Barinov V.A., Nikanov A.N., Andreenko O.N. et al. Prospects for the use of biomonitoring technologies in occupational pathology. 2024: Materialy Vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 100-letiyu FBUN SZNTs gigieny i obshchestvennogo zdorov'ya Rospotrebnadzora. SPb.: 426–33. https://elibrary.ru/qlsweb (in Russian).

31. Kudria M.Ya., Lalymenko O.S., Karachentsev Y.I., Zavhorodnу I.V. For the question of xenobiotics biological monitoring. Environment & Health. 2017; 1: 65–72. https://clck.ru/3TigW5 (in Russian).

32. Derek C.G. Muir, Getzinger G.J., McBride M., Ferguson P.L. How many chemicals in commerce have been analyzed in environmental media? A 50 Year bibliometric analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2023; 57: 9119–9129. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c09353

33. Kirsanov K.I., Lesovaya E.A., Zhidkova E.M., Vlasova O.A., Osipova A.V., Lylova E.S. et.al Buccal micronucleus cytome assay for the evaluation of cytogenetic status of healthcare professionals contacting with anti-cancer drugs. Russian Journal of Genetics. 2022; 58(5): 528–537. https://elibrary.ru/ugcyjq (in Russian).

34. Solenova L.G. Epidemiological monitoring of cancer risk in cancer center workers. Advances in Molecular Oncology. 2019; 6(3): 63–70. https://doi.org/10.17650/2313-805X-2019-6-3-63-70 (in Russian).

35. Solenova L.G. Yakubovskaya M.G. Chemotherapy: some potential risks under antineoplastic drugs handling. Advances in Molecular Oncology. 2017; 4(3): 10–20. https://doi.org/10.17650/2313-805X-2017-4-3-10-20 (in Russian).

36. Portilha-Cunha M.F., Alves A., Santos M.S. Cytostatics in Indoor Environment: An Update of Analytical Methods. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2021; 14(6): 574. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph14060574

37. Anna Pałaszewska-Tkacz, Sławomir Czerczak, Katarzyna Konieczko, Małgorzata Kupczewska-Dobecka. Cytostatics as hazardous chemicals in healthcare workers' environment. Int. J. Occup. Med. Environ. Health. 2019; 32(2): 141–59. https://doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.01248

38. Saint-Lorant G., Vasseur M., Allorge D. et al. Four-year follow-up of surface contamination by antineoplastic drugs in a compounding unit. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2023; 80: 146–53. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2022-108623

39. Korczowska E, Jankowiak-Gracz H, Crul M., Tuerk J., Arnold D., Meier K. 3PC-041 Surface contamination with cytotoxic drugs in European hospital wards. European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. 2020; 27: A41. https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2020-eahpconf.88

40. Pereira J., Mateus R., Pires S., Sernache S.,Gonçalves H., Gouveia A. Risk assessment of occupational exposure to cytotoxic drugs in an outpatient hospital pharmacy. European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. 2021; 28: A174. https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2021-eahpconf.364

41. Burch A., Pfeuti R., Mack J., Vella G. Antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs: risk potential and exposure – less is more! European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. 2021; 28: A176. https://doi.org10.1136/ejhpharm-2021-eahpconf.367

42. Stephanie A. Salch, William C. Zamboni, Pharm D., Beth A. Zamboni, Stephen F. Eckel. Patterns and characteristics associated with surface contamination of hazardous drugs in hospital pharmacies. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2019; 76(9): 591–598. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxz033

43. Riestra A.C., Urretavizcaya M., Ferro Uriguen A., Olatz Olariaga Sarasola, Ainara Iglesias,Yoana Camba et al. Monitoring of occupational exposure to hazardous medicinal products in robotic compounding. European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy Published Online First. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2024-004294

44. Cotteret C., Secretan P., Gilles-Afchain L., Laurence Gilles-Afchain, Julia Rousseau, Fabrice Vidal et al. External contamination of antineoplastic drug vials: an occupational risk to consider. European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. 2022; 29: 284–286. https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2020-002440

45. Beigzadeh Z., Golbabaei F., Omidi F., Jamaleddin Shahtaheri S. Comparative analysis of dermal and inhalation exposures to antineoplastic drugs among workers in the workplaces: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2025; 25(1): 1800. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-21191-4

46. Claudio Müller-Ramírez, Claydio Almashat, Gaitens S., McDiarmid J. Carcinogenic drug exposure among health-sector workers: the need for exposure assessment and surveillance Rev. Panam Salud Publica. 2023; 47: e11. https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2023.11

47. Johannes Gerding, Lea Anhäuser, Udo Eickmann, Albert Nienhaus. A simple approach to assess the cancer risk of occupational exposure to genotoxic drugs in healthcare settings. J. Occup. Med. Toxicol. 2022; 17(1): 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-022-00349-z

48. Thomas H. Connor, Matthew D. Zock, Amy H. Snow. Surface wipe sampling for antineoplastic (chemotherapy) and other hazardous drug residue in healthcare settings: Methodology and recommendations. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 2016; 13(9): 658–667. https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2016.1165912

49. Hon C.Y., Abusitta D. Causes of health care workers' exposure to antineoplastic drugs: An exploratory study. Can. J. Hosp. Pharm. 2016; 69: 216–23. https://doi.org/10.4212/cjhp.v69i3.1558

50. Nitin Vyas, Yiannakis D., Turner A., Sewell G. J. Occupational exposure to anti-cancer drugs: A review of effects of new technology. J. Oncol. Pharm. Pract. 2014; 20(4): 278–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155213498630

51. Klimov V.I., Lalymenko O.S., Korsun L.V. Potential risks of occupational exposure to innovative biopharmaceuticals: a review. Extreme Medicine. 2024; 26(4): 74–81. https://doi.org/10.47183/mes.2024-26-4-74-81 (in Russian).

52. Nygren O., Lindahl R. Screening of spill and leakage of antibiotics in hospital wards. J. ASTM. 2011; 8: 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1520/JAI103453

53. Sessink P., Tans B., Devolder D., Schrijvers R., Spriet I. Evaluation of environmental antibiotic contamination by surface wipe sampling in a large care centre. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. 2024; 79(7): 1637–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkae159

54. Van Nimmen N.F., Poels K.L., Severi M.J., Godderis L., Veulemans H.A. Selecting an appropriate biomonitoring strategy to evaluate dermal exposure to opioid narcotic analgesics in pharmaceutical production workers. Occup. Environ. Med. 2010; 67(7): 464–70. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.2009.050583

55. Gromek K., Hawkins W., Tanja Bernier, Claudia Sehner, Eva Zeller. Deriving harmonised permitted daily exposures (pdes) for paracetamol (acetaminophen) cas N: 103-90-2. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2020. 115: 104692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104692

56. Kortenkamp A., Scholze M., Ermler S., Priskorn L., Jørgensen N. Combined exposures to bisphenols, polychlorinated dioxins, paracetamol, and phthalates as drivers of deteriorating semen quality. Environ Int. 2022; 165: 107322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2022.107322

57. Jiang-yang Zhao, Mezbah Uddin, Daisy Unsihuay, William Butler, Terrance W. Xia, Jayson Z. Xu et al. Rapid and sensitive detection of Fentanyl and its analogs by a novel chemiluminescence immunoassay. Clin Chem. 2024; 70(7): 978–86. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvae071

58. Yanwei Y., Xu Z., Xiao L., Sun Qi, Fu Hui, Lu Yifu. Quality control strategy for targeted quantitative analysis of chemical pollutants in China National Human Biomonitoring Program. Chinese Journal of Chromatography. 2025; 43(6): 559–570. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1123.2024.11022

59. Mahdavijalal M., Petio C., Staffilano G., Mandrioli R., Protti M. Innovative solid-phase extraction strategies for improving the advanced chromatographic determination of drugs in challenging biological samples. Molecules. 2024; 29(10) :2278. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29102278

60. Sophie Ndaw Aurélie Remy. Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs in twelve french health care setting: biological monitoring and surface contamination. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2023; 20(6): 4952. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064952

61. Béchet V., Benoist H., Beau F., Divanon F., Lagadu S., Sichel F. Blood contamination of the pharmaceutical staff by irinotecan and its two major metabolites inside and outside a compounding unit. J. Oncol. Pharm. Pract. 2022; 28(4): 777–84.

62. Friese C.R., McArdle C., Zhao T., Sun D., Spasojevic I., Polovich M., McCullagh M.C. Antineoplastic drug exposure in an ambulatory setting: A pilot study. Cancer Nurs. 2015; 38: 111–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0000000000000143

63. Ai Hori, Mari Shimura, Yutaka Iida, Kazuhiko Yamada, Kyoko Nohara, Takayuki Ichinose et al. Оccupational exposure of platinum-based anti-cancer drugs: five-year monitoring of hair and environmental samples in a single hospital. J. Occup. Med. Toxicol. 2020; 15: 29 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-020-00280-1

64. Saint-Lorant G., Rodier S., Guilloit J.M., Ndaw S., Melczer M., Lagadu S. et al. Is the blood of a surgeon performing HIPEC contaminated by irinotecan, its major metabolites and platinum compounds? Pleura Peritoneum. 2021; 6: 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2020-0141

65. Dugheri S., Squillaci D., Saccomando V., Marrubini G., Bucaletti E. An automated micro solid-phase extraction (μSpe) liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry method for cyclophosphamide and iphosphamide: biological monitoring in antineoplastic drug (AD) occupational exposure. Molecules. 2024; 29(3): 638. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29030638

66. Pan Shu, Ting Zhao, Bo Wen, Kari Mendelsohn-Victor, Duxin Sun, Christopher R Friese. et al. Application of an innovative high-throughput liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for simultaneous analysis of 18 hazardous drugs to rule out accidental acute chemotherapy exposures in health care workers. Oncol Pharm Pract. 2019; 26(4): 794–802. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155219870591

67. Villa A., Molimard M., Sakr D., Lassalle R., Bignon E., Martinez B., Rouyer M., Mathoulin-Pelissier S., Baldi I., Verdun-Esquer C., et al. Nurses’ internal contamination by antineoplastic drugs in hospital centers: a cross-sectional descriptive study. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health. 2021; 94: 1839–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-021-01706-x

68. Palamini M., Dufour A., Therrien R., Delisle J.F., Mercier G., Gagné S., Caron N., Bussières J.F. Quantification of healthcare workers’ exposure to cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil by 24-h urine assay: a descriptive pilot study. J. Oncol. Pharm. Pract. 2020; 26: 1864–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155220907129

69. Mathias P.I., Connor T.H., Hymer C.B. A review of high performance liquid chromatographic-mass spectrometric urinary methods for anticancer drug exposure of health care workers. J. Chromatogr. B. Analyt. Technol. Biomed. Life Sci. 2017; 1060: 316–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2017.06.028

70. Chun-Yip Hon, Teschke K., Hui Shen, Paul A. Demers, Scott Venners Antineoplastic drug contamination in the urine of Canadian healthcare workers. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health. 2015; 88: 933–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-015-1026-1