1
|
Blanco MN, Shaffer RM, Li G, Adar SD, Carone M, Szpiro AA, Kaufman JD, Larson TV, Hajat A, Larson EB, Crane PK, Sheppard L. Traffic-related air pollution and dementia incidence in the Adult Changes in Thought Study. Environ Int 2024; 183:108418. [PMID: 38185046 PMCID: PMC10873482 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2024.108418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2023] [Revised: 12/22/2023] [Accepted: 01/02/2024] [Indexed: 01/09/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While epidemiologic evidence links higher levels of exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) to decreased cognitive function, fewer studies have investigated links with traffic-related air pollution (TRAP), and none have examined ultrafine particles (UFP, ≤100 nm) and late-life dementia incidence. OBJECTIVE To evaluate associations between TRAP exposures (UFP, black carbon [BC], and nitrogen dioxide [NO2]) and late-life dementia incidence. METHODS We ascertained dementia incidence in the Seattle-based Adult Changes in Thought (ACT) prospective cohort study (beginning in 1994) and assessed ten-year average TRAP exposures for each participant based on prediction models derived from an extensive mobile monitoring campaign. We applied Cox proportional hazards models to investigate TRAP exposure and dementia incidence using age as the time axis and further adjusting for sex, self-reported race, calendar year, education, socioeconomic status, PM2.5, and APOE genotype. We ran sensitivity analyses where we did not adjust for PM2.5 and other sensitivity and secondary analyses where we adjusted for multiple pollutants, applied alternative exposure models (including total and size-specific UFP), modified the adjustment covariates, used calendar year as the time axis, assessed different exposure periods, dementia subtypes, and others. RESULTS We identified 1,041 incident all-cause dementia cases in 4,283 participants over 37,102 person-years of follow-up. We did not find evidence of a greater hazard of late-life dementia incidence with elevated levels of long-term TRAP exposures. The estimated hazard ratio of all-cause dementia was 0.98 (95 % CI: 0.92-1.05) for every 2000 pt/cm3 increment in UFP, 0.95 (0.89-1.01) for every 100 ng/m3 increment in BC, and 0.96 (0.91-1.02) for every 2 ppb increment in NO2. These findings were consistent across sensitivity and secondary analyses. DISCUSSION We did not find evidence of a greater hazard of late-life dementia risk with elevated long-term TRAP exposures in this population-based prospective cohort study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Magali N Blanco
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Ge Li
- VA Northwest Network Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Virginia Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA; Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Virginia Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Sara D Adar
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Marco Carone
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Adam A Szpiro
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Joel D Kaufman
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Timothy V Larson
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Anjum Hajat
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Eric B Larson
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Paul K Crane
- Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Lianne Sheppard
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Luben TJ, Shaffer RM, Kenyon E, Nembhard WN, Weber KA, Nuckols J, Wright JM. Comparison of Trihalomethane exposure assessment metrics in epidemiologic analyses of reproductive and developmental outcomes. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 2024; 34:115-125. [PMID: 37316533 DOI: 10.1038/s41370-023-00559-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2023] [Revised: 05/12/2023] [Accepted: 05/31/2023] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Researchers have developed exposure assessment metrics for disinfection by-products (DBPs) utilizing drinking water monitoring data and accounting for spatial and temporal variability, water consumption, and showering and bathing time with an expectation of decreasing exposure misclassification compared to the use of measured concentrations at public water supply (PWS) monitoring locations alone. OBJECTIVE We used exposure data collected for a previous study of DBPs to evaluate how different sources of information impact trihalomethane (THM) exposure estimates. METHODS We compared gestational exposure estimates to THMs based on water utility monitoring data alone, statistical imputation of daily concentrations to incorporate temporal variability, and personal water consumption and use (bathing and showering). We used Spearman correlation coefficients and ranked kappa statistics to compare exposure classifications. RESULTS Exposure estimates based on measured or imputed daily THM concentrations, self-reported consumption, or bathing and showering differed substantially from estimates based solely on concentrations from PWS quarterly monitoring reports. Ranked exposure classifications, high to low quartiles or deciles, were generally consistent across each exposure metric (i.e., a subject with "high" exposure based on measured or imputed THM concentrations generally remained in the "high" category across exposure metrics.) The measured concentrations and imputed daily (i.e., spline regression) concentrations were highly correlated (r = 0.98). The weighted kappa statistics comparing exposure estimates using different exposure metrics ranged from 0.27 to 0.89, with the highest values for the ingestion + bathing/showering metrics compared to metrics for bathing/showering only (0.76 and 0.89). Bathing and showering contributed the most to "total" THM exposure estimates. IMPACT STATEMENT We compare exposure metrics capturing temporal variability and multiple estimates of personal THM exposure with THM concentrations from PWS monitoring data. Our results show exposure estimates based on imputed daily concentrations accounting for temporal variability were very similar to the measured THM concentrations. We observed low agreement between imputed daily concentrations and ingestion-based estimates. Considering additional routes of exposure (e.g., inhalation and dermal) slightly increased agreement with the measured PWS exposure estimate in this population. Overall, the comparison of exposure assessment metrics allows researchers to understand the added value of additional data collection for future epidemiologic analyses of DBPs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas J Luben
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. RTP, NC, Washington, DC, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. RTP, NC, Washington, DC, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Elaina Kenyon
- Center for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RTP, RTP, NC, USA
| | - Wendy N Nembhard
- Arkansas Center for Birth Defects Research and Prevention and the Department of Epidemiology, Fay. W. Boozman College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
| | - Kari A Weber
- Arkansas Center for Birth Defects Research and Prevention and the Department of Epidemiology, Fay. W. Boozman College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
| | - John Nuckols
- Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA; JRN Environmental Health Sciences, LTD, North Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - J Michael Wright
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. RTP, NC, Washington, DC, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Thayer KA, Angrish M, Arzuaga X, Carlson LM, Davis A, Dishaw L, Druwe I, Gibbons C, Glenn B, Jones R, Phillip Kaiser J, Keshava C, Keshava N, Kraft A, Lizarraga L, Persad A, Radke EG, Rice G, Schulz B, Shaffer RM, Shannon T, Shapiro A, Thacker S, Vulimiri SV, Williams AJ, Woodall G, Yost E, Blain R, Duke K, Goldstone AE, Hartman P, Hobbie K, Ingle B, Lemeris C, Lin C, Lindahl A, McKinley K, Soleymani P, Vetter N. Corrigendum to "Systematic evidence map (SEM) template: Report format and methods used for the US EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program, Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) program, and other "fit for purpose" literature-based human health analyses" [Environ. Int. 169 (2022) 107468]. Environ Int 2023:107929. [PMID: 37127446 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.107929] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Kristina A Thayer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Michelle Angrish
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Xabier Arzuaga
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Laura M Carlson
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Allen Davis
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Laura Dishaw
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Ingrid Druwe
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Catherine Gibbons
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Barbara Glenn
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Ryan Jones
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - J Phillip Kaiser
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Channa Keshava
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Nagalakshmi Keshava
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Andrew Kraft
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Lucina Lizarraga
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Amanda Persad
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Elizabeth G Radke
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Glenn Rice
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | | | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Teresa Shannon
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Andrew Shapiro
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Shane Thacker
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Suryanarayana V Vulimiri
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | | | - George Woodall
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Erin Yost
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shaffer RM, Wright JM, Cote I, Bateson TF. Comparative susceptibility of children and adults to neurological effects of inhaled manganese: A review of the published literature. Environ Res 2023; 221:115319. [PMID: 36669586 DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.115319] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2022] [Revised: 01/13/2023] [Accepted: 01/16/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Manganese (Mn) is neurotoxic in adults and children. Current assessments are based on the more extensive adult epidemiological data, but the potential for greater childhood susceptibility remains a concern. To better understand potential lifestage-based variations, we compared susceptibilities to neurotoxicity in children and adults using Mn biomarker data. METHODS We developed a literature search strategy based on a Population, Exposures, Comparators, and Outcomes statement focusing on inhalation exposures and neurological outcomes in humans. Screening was performed using DistillerSR. Hair biomarker studies were selected for evaluation because studies with air measurements were unavailable or considered inadequate for children. Studies were paired based on concordant Mn source, biomarker, and outcome. Comparisons were made based on reported dose-response slopes (children vs. adults). Study evaluation was conducted to understand the confidence in our comparisons. RESULTS We identified five studies evaluating seven pairings of hair Mn and neurological outcomes (cognition and motor effects) in children and adults matched on sources of environmental Mn inhalation exposure. Two Brazilian studies of children and one of adults reported intelligent quotient (IQ) effects; effects in both comparisons were stronger in children (1.21 to 2.03-fold difference). In paired analyses of children and adults from the United States, children exhibited both stronger and weaker effects compared to adults (0.37 to 1.75-fold differences) on postural sway metrics. CONCLUSION There is limited information on the comparative susceptibility of children and adults to inhaled Mn. We report that children may be 0.37 to 2.03 times as susceptible as adults to neurotoxic effects of Mn, thereby providing a quantitative estimate for some aspects of lifestage variation. Due to the limited number of paired studies available in the literature, this quantitative estimate should be interpreted with caution. Our analyses do not account for other sources of inter-individual variation. Additional studies of Mn-exposed children with direct air concentration measurements would improve the evidence base.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M Shaffer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA
| | - J Michael Wright
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Ila Cote
- University of Colorado, School of Public Health, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Thomas F Bateson
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Carlson LM, Christensen K, Sagiv SK, Rajan P, Klocke CR, Lein PJ, Coffman E, Shaffer RM, Yost EE, Arzuaga X, Factor-Litvak P, Sergeev A, Toborek M, Bloom MS, Trgovcich J, Jusko TA, Robertson L, Meeker JD, Keating AF, Blain R, Silva RA, Snow S, Lin C, Shipkowski K, Ingle B, Lehmann GM. A systematic evidence map for the evaluation of noncancer health effects and exposures to polychlorinated biphenyl mixtures. Environ Res 2023; 220:115148. [PMID: 36580985 PMCID: PMC10013199 DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.115148] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2022] [Revised: 12/12/2022] [Accepted: 12/22/2022] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
Assessing health outcomes associated with exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) is important given their persistent and ubiquitous nature. PCBs are classified as a Group 1 carcinogen, but the full range of potential noncancer health effects from exposure to PCBs has not been systematically summarized and evaluated. We used systematic review methods to identify and screen the literature using combined manual review and machine learning approaches. A protocol was developed that describes the literature search strategy and Populations, Exposures, Comparators, and Outcomes (PECO) criteria used to facilitate subsequent screening and categorization of literature into a systematic evidence map of PCB exposure and noncancer health endpoints across 15 organs/systems. A comprehensive literature search yielded 62,599 records. After electronic prioritization steps, 17,037 studies were manually screened at the title and abstract level. An additional 900 studies identified by experts or supplemental searches were also included. After full-text screening of 3889 references, 1586 studies met the PECO criteria. Relevant study details such as the endpoints assessed, exposure duration, and species were extracted into literature summary tables. This review compiles and organizes the human and mammalian studies from these tables into an evidence map for noncancer health endpoints and PCB mixture exposure to identify areas of robust research as well as areas of uncertainty that would benefit from future investigation. Summary data are available online as interactive visuals with downloadable metadata. Sufficient research is available to inform PCB hazard assessments for most organs/systems, but the amount of data to inform associations with specific endpoints differs. Furthermore, despite many years of research, sparse data exist for inhalation and dermal exposures, which are highly relevant human exposure routes. This evidence map provides a foundation for future systematic reviews and noncancer hazard assessments of PCB mixtures and for strategic planning of research to inform areas of greater uncertainty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura M Carlson
- Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
| | - Krista Christensen
- Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
| | - Sharon K Sagiv
- Center for Environmental Research and Children's Health (CERCH), School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
| | | | - Carolyn R Klocke
- Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of California, Davis School of Veterinary Medicine, Davis, CA, USA.
| | - Pamela J Lein
- Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of California, Davis School of Veterinary Medicine, Davis, CA, USA.
| | - Evan Coffman
- Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
| | - Erin E Yost
- Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
| | - Xabier Arzuaga
- Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
| | - Pam Factor-Litvak
- Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | - Todd A Jusko
- University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA.
| | | | | | - Aileen F Keating
- Department of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | - Kelly Shipkowski
- ICF, Fairfax, VA, Currently at National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, USA.
| | - Brandall Ingle
- ICF, Fairfax, VA, Currently at US Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
| | - Geniece M Lehmann
- Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, US Environmental Protection Agency, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Nielsen GH, Heiger-Bernays WJ, Levy JI, White RF, Axelrad DA, Lam J, Chartres N, Abrahamsson DP, Rayasam SDG, Shaffer RM, Zeise L, Woodruff TJ, Ginsberg GL. Application of probabilistic methods to address variability and uncertainty in estimating risks for non-cancer health effects. Environ Health 2023; 21:129. [PMID: 36635712 PMCID: PMC9835218 DOI: 10.1186/s12940-022-00918-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
Human health risk assessment currently uses the reference dose or reference concentration (RfD, RfC) approach to describe the level of exposure to chemical hazards without appreciable risk for non-cancer health effects in people. However, this "bright line" approach assumes that there is minimal risk below the RfD/RfC with some undefined level of increased risk at exposures above the RfD/RfC and has limited utility for decision-making. Rather than this dichotomous approach, non-cancer risk assessment can benefit from incorporating probabilistic methods to estimate the amount of risk across a wide range of exposures and define a risk-specific dose. We identify and review existing approaches for conducting probabilistic non-cancer risk assessments. Using perchloroethylene (PCE), a priority chemical for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the Toxic Substances Control Act, we calculate risk-specific doses for the effects on cognitive deficits using probabilistic risk assessment approaches. Our probabilistic risk assessment shows that chronic exposure to 0.004 ppm PCE is associated with approximately 1-in-1,000 risk for a 5% reduced performance on the Wechsler Memory Scale Visual Reproduction subtest with 95% confidence. This exposure level associated with a 1-in-1000 risk for non-cancer neurocognitive deficits is lower than the current RfC for PCE of 0.0059 ppm, which is based on standard point of departure and uncertainty factor approaches for the same neurotoxic effects in occupationally exposed adults. We found that the population-level risk of cognitive deficit (indicating central nervous system dysfunction) is estimated to be greater than the cancer risk level of 1-in-100,000 at a similar chronic exposure level. The extension of toxicological endpoints to more clinically relevant endpoints, along with consideration of magnitude and severity of effect, will help in the selection of acceptable risk targets for non-cancer effects. We find that probabilistic approaches can 1) provide greater context to existing RfDs and RfCs by describing the probability of effect across a range of exposure levels including the RfD/RfC in a diverse population for a given magnitude of effect and confidence level, 2) relate effects of chemical exposures to clinical disease risk so that the resulting risk assessments can better inform decision-makers and benefit-cost analysis, and 3) better reflect the underlying biology and uncertainties of population risks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Greylin H Nielsen
- Department of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, T4W, Boston, MA, 02118, USA
| | - Wendy J Heiger-Bernays
- Department of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, T4W, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.
| | - Jonathan I Levy
- Department of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, T4W, Boston, MA, 02118, USA
| | - Roberta F White
- Department of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, T4W, Boston, MA, 02118, USA
| | | | - Juleen Lam
- Department of Public Health, California State University, East Bay, Hayward, CA, USA
| | - Nicholas Chartres
- Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Dimitri Panagopoulos Abrahamsson
- Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Swati D G Rayasam
- Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Lauren Zeise
- Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency, Oakland, CA, USA
| | - Tracey J Woodruff
- Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Gary L Ginsberg
- Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Woodruff TJ, Rayasam SDG, Axelrad DA, Koman PD, Chartres N, Bennett DH, Birnbaum LS, Brown P, Carignan CC, Cooper C, Cranor CF, Diamond ML, Franjevic S, Gartner EC, Hattis D, Hauser R, Heiger-Bernays W, Joglekar R, Lam J, Levy JI, MacRoy PM, Maffini MV, Marquez EC, Morello-Frosch R, Nachman KE, Nielsen GH, Oksas C, Abrahamsson DP, Patisaul HB, Patton S, Robinson JF, Rodgers KM, Rossi MS, Rudel RA, Sass JB, Sathyanarayana S, Schettler T, Shaffer RM, Shamasunder B, Shepard PM, Shrader-Frechette K, Solomon GM, Subra WA, Vandenberg LN, Varshavsky JR, White RF, Zarker K, Zeise L. A science-based agenda for health-protective chemical assessments and decisions: overview and consensus statement. Environ Health 2023; 21:132. [PMID: 36635734 PMCID: PMC9835243 DOI: 10.1186/s12940-022-00930-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/27/2022] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
The manufacture and production of industrial chemicals continues to increase, with hundreds of thousands of chemicals and chemical mixtures used worldwide, leading to widespread population exposures and resultant health impacts. Low-wealth communities and communities of color often bear disproportionate burdens of exposure and impact; all compounded by regulatory delays to the detriment of public health. Multiple authoritative bodies and scientific consensus groups have called for actions to prevent harmful exposures via improved policy approaches. We worked across multiple disciplines to develop consensus recommendations for health-protective, scientific approaches to reduce harmful chemical exposures, which can be applied to current US policies governing industrial chemicals and environmental pollutants. This consensus identifies five principles and scientific recommendations for improving how agencies like the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approach and conduct hazard and risk assessment and risk management analyses: (1) the financial burden of data generation for any given chemical on (or to be introduced to) the market should be on the chemical producers that benefit from their production and use; (2) lack of data does not equate to lack of hazard, exposure, or risk; (3) populations at greater risk, including those that are more susceptible or more highly exposed, must be better identified and protected to account for their real-world risks; (4) hazard and risk assessments should not assume existence of a "safe" or "no-risk" level of chemical exposure in the diverse general population; and (5) hazard and risk assessments must evaluate and account for financial conflicts of interest in the body of evidence. While many of these recommendations focus specifically on the EPA, they are general principles for environmental health that could be adopted by any agency or entity engaged in exposure, hazard, and risk assessment. We also detail recommendations for four priority areas in companion papers (exposure assessment methods, human variability assessment, methods for quantifying non-cancer health outcomes, and a framework for defining chemical classes). These recommendations constitute key steps for improved evidence-based environmental health decision-making and public health protection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tracey J Woodruff
- Program On Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 490 Illinois Street, Floor 10, Box 0132, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
| | - Swati D G Rayasam
- Program On Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 490 Illinois Street, Floor 10, Box 0132, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
| | | | - Patricia D Koman
- Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Nicholas Chartres
- Program On Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 490 Illinois Street, Floor 10, Box 0132, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
| | - Deborah H Bennett
- Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| | - Linda S Birnbaum
- National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences and National Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
- Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Phil Brown
- Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Courtney C Carignan
- Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
| | - Courtney Cooper
- Program On Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 490 Illinois Street, Floor 10, Box 0132, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
| | - Carl F Cranor
- Department of Philosophy, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA
- Environmental Toxicology Graduate Program, College of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA
| | - Miriam L Diamond
- Department of Earth Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
- School of the Environment, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Dale Hattis
- The George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark University, Worcester, MA, USA
| | - Russ Hauser
- Department of Environmental Health, T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Wendy Heiger-Bernays
- Department of Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Juleen Lam
- Department of Public Health, California State University, East Bay, Hayward, CA, USA
| | - Jonathan I Levy
- Department of Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Rachel Morello-Frosch
- School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA
| | - Keeve E Nachman
- Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Johns Hopkins Risk Sciences and Public Policy Institute, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Greylin H Nielsen
- Department of Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Catherine Oksas
- School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Dimitri Panagopoulos Abrahamsson
- Program On Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 490 Illinois Street, Floor 10, Box 0132, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
| | - Heather B Patisaul
- Department of Biological Sciences, Center for Human Health and the Environment, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
| | | | - Joshua F Robinson
- Program On Reproductive Health and the Environment, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 490 Illinois Street, Floor 10, Box 0132, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA
- Center for Reproductive Sciences, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Sheela Sathyanarayana
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Child Health, Behavior, and Development, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Ted Schettler
- Science and Environmental Health Network, Ames, IA, USA
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, USA
| | - Bhavna Shamasunder
- Department of Urban & Environmental Policy and Public Health, Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Kristin Shrader-Frechette
- Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA
- Department of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA
| | - Gina M Solomon
- School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Public Health Institute, Oakland, CA, USA
| | - Wilma A Subra
- Louisiana Environmental Action Network, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
| | - Laura N Vandenberg
- Department of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health & Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, MA, USA
| | - Julia R Varshavsky
- Department of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Roberta F White
- Department of Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Ken Zarker
- Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA, USA
| | - Lauren Zeise
- Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency, Oakland, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Thayer KA, Angrish M, Arzuaga X, Carlson LM, Davis A, Dishaw L, Druwe I, Gibbons C, Glenn B, Jones R, Phillip Kaiser J, Keshava C, Keshava N, Kraft A, Lizarraga L, Persad A, Radke EG, Rice G, Schulz B, Shaffer RM, Shannon T, Shapiro A, Thacker S, Vulimiri SV, Williams AJ, Woodall G, Yost E, Blain R, Duke K, Goldstone AE, Hartman P, Hobbie K, Ingle B, Lemeris C, Lin C, Lindahl A, McKinley K, Soleymani P, Vetter N. Systematic evidence map (SEM) template: Report format and methods used for the US EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program, Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) program, and other "fit for purpose" literature-based human health analyses. Environ Int 2022; 169:107468. [PMID: 36174483 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107468] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2022] [Revised: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/09/2022] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Systematic evidence maps (SEMs) are gaining visibility in environmental health for their utility to serve as problem formulation tools and assist in decision-making, especially for priority setting. SEMs are now routinely prepared as part of the assessment development process for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) and Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) assessments. SEMs can also be prepared to explore the available literature for an individual chemical or groups of chemicals of emerging interest. OBJECTIVES This document describes the typical methods used to produce SEMs for the IRIS and PPRTV Programs, as well as "fit for purpose" applications using a variety of examples drawn from existing analyses. It is intended to serve as an example base template that can be adapted as needed for the specific SEM. The presented methods include workflows intended to facilitate rapid production. The Populations, Exposures, Comparators and Outcomes (PECO) criteria are typically kept broad to identify mammalian animal bioassay and epidemiological studies that could be informative for human hazard identification. In addition, a variety of supplemental content is tracked, e.g., studies presenting information on in vitro model systems, non-mammalian model systems, exposure-level-only studies in humans, pharmacokinetic models, and absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME). The availability of New Approach Methods (NAMs) evidence is also tracked (e.g., high throughput, transcriptomic, in silico, etc.). Genotoxicity studies may be considered as PECO relevant or supplemental material, depending on the topic and context of the review. Standard systematic review practices (e.g., two independent reviewers per record) and specialized software applications are used to search and screen the literature and may include the use of machine learning software. Mammalian bioassay and epidemiological studies that meet the PECO criteria after full-text review are briefly summarized using structured web-based extraction forms with respect to study design and health system(s) assessed. Extracted data is available in interactive visual formats and can be downloaded in open access formats. Methods for conducting study evaluation are also presented which is conducted on a case-by-case basis, depending on the usage of the SEM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristina A Thayer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Michelle Angrish
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Xabier Arzuaga
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Laura M Carlson
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Allen Davis
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Laura Dishaw
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Ingrid Druwe
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Catherine Gibbons
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Barbara Glenn
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Ryan Jones
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - J Phillip Kaiser
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Channa Keshava
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Nagalakshmi Keshava
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Andrew Kraft
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Lucina Lizarraga
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Amanda Persad
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Elizabeth G Radke
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Glenn Rice
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | | | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Teresa Shannon
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | - Andrew Shapiro
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Shane Thacker
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Suryanarayana V Vulimiri
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | | | - George Woodall
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Erin Yost
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, DC, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Weitekamp CA, Shaffer RM, Chiang C, Lehmann GM, Christensen K. An evidence map of polychlorinated biphenyl exposure and health outcome studies among residents of the Akwesasne Mohawk Nation. Chemosphere 2022; 306:135454. [PMID: 35764106 PMCID: PMC9444975 DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135454] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2022] [Revised: 06/17/2022] [Accepted: 06/20/2022] [Indexed: 05/19/2023]
Abstract
From the 1950s to the 1970s, three Superfund sites discharged polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)-contaminated waste upstream of the Mohawk Nation at Akwesasne, resulting in PCB contamination of groundwater, soil, and sediment in the surrounding area. Given the persistence of PCBs in the environment and in human tissues, there are continued concerns regarding PCB exposures and the potential for adverse health effects in the community. We developed an evidence map of PCB research at Akwesasne in order to characterize the available data and to highlight potential research needs. Human health and exposure biomarker studies were identified from a literature search based on population, exposure, comparator, and outcome (PECO) criteria. Data extracted from references that met the inclusion criteria after full-text review included study characteristics (e.g., sample size, study design, sampling years), details on PCB measurements (e.g., analytical method, number of congeners analyzed, method detection limits), and results (e.g., PCB levels and summary of study conclusions). We identified 33 studies, conducted between 1986 and 2013, that examined PCB exposure characteristics and health effects in residents of the Akwesasne Mohawk Nation. Organizing this literature into an evidence map including information on study cohort, congener groupings, exposure biomarker characteristics, and health effects allowed us to identify research gaps and to suggest future research priorities for the community. We identified current PCB exposure levels and PCB source characterization as major uncertainties, both of which could be addressed by new studies of PCB concentrations in environmental media.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chelsea A Weitekamp
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Catheryne Chiang
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Geniece M Lehmann
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
| | - Krista Christensen
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Thayer KA, Shaffer RM, Angrish M, Arzuaga X, Carlson LM, Davis A, Dishaw L, Druwe I, Gibbons C, Glenn B, Jones R, Kaiser JP, Keshava C, Keshava N, Kraft A, Lizarraga L, Markey K, Persad A, Radke EG, Rice G, Schulz B, Shannon T, Shapiro A, Thacker S, Vulimiri S, Woodall G, Yost E. Use of systematic evidence maps within the US environmental protection agency (EPA) integrated risk information system (IRIS) program: Advancements to date and looking ahead. Environ Int 2022; 169:107363. [PMID: 36057470 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107363] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2022] [Accepted: 06/16/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
Systematic evidence maps (SEMs) are increasingly used to inform decision-making and risk management priority-setting and to serve as problem formulation tools to refine the focus of questions that get addressed in full systematic reviews. Within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), SEMs have been used to inform data gaps, determine the need for updated assessments, inform assessment priorities, and inform development of study evaluation considerations, among other uses. Increased utilization of SEMs across the environmental health field has the potential to increase transparency and efficiency for data gathering, problem formulation, read-across, and evidence surveillance. Use of the SEM templates published in the companion text (Thayer et al.) can promote harmonization in the environmental health community and create more opportunities for sharing extracted content.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristina A Thayer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Michelle Angrish
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Xabier Arzuaga
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Laura M Carlson
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Allen Davis
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Laura Dishaw
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Ingrid Druwe
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Catherine Gibbons
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Barbara Glenn
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Ryan Jones
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - J Phillip Kaiser
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Channa Keshava
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Nagalakshmi Keshava
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Andrew Kraft
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Lucina Lizarraga
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Kristan Markey
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Amanda Persad
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Elizabeth G Radke
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Glenn Rice
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | | | - Teresa Shannon
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Andrew Shapiro
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Shane Thacker
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Suryanarayana Vulimiri
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - George Woodall
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Health & Environmental Effects Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA.
| | - Erin Yost
- Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Chemical & Pollutant Assessment Division, US EPA, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Shaffer RM, Forsyth JE, Ferraro G, Till C, Carlson LM, Hester K, Haddock A, Strawbridge J, Lanfear CC, Hu H, Kirrane E. Lead exposure and antisocial behavior: A systematic review protocol. Environ Int 2022; 168:107438. [PMID: 35994796 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107438] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2022] [Revised: 07/19/2022] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lead exposure remains highly prevalent worldwide despite decades of research highlighting its link to numerous adverse health outcomes. In addition to well-documented effects on cognition, there is growing evidence of an association with antisocial behavior, including aggression, conduct problems, and crime. An updated systematic review on this topic, incorporating study evaluation and a developmental perspective on the outcome, can advance the state of the science on lead and inform global policy interventions to reduce exposure. OBJECTIVES We aim to evaluate the link between lead exposure and antisocial behavior. This association will be investigated via a systematic review of human epidemiological and experimental nonhuman mammalian studies. METHODS The systematic review protocol presented in this publication is informed by recommendations for the conduct of systematic reviews in toxicology and environmental health research (COSTER) and follows the study evaluation approach put forth by the U.S. EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program. DATA SOURCES We will search the following electronic databases for relevant literature: PubMed, BIOSIS and Web of Science. Search results will be stored in EPA's Health and Environmental Research Online (HERO) database. STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Eligible human epidemiological studies will include those evaluating any population exposed to lead at any lifestage via ingestion or inhalation exposure and considering an outcome of antisocial behavior based on any of the following criteria: psychiatric diagnoses (e.g., oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), conduct disorder (CD), disruptive behavior disorders (DBD)); violation of social norms (e.g., delinquency, criminality); and aggression. Eligible experimental animal studies will include those evaluating nonhuman mammalian studies exposed to lead via ingestion, inhalation, or injection exposure during any lifestage. The following outcomes will be considered relevant: aggression; antisocial behavior; and altered fear, anxiety, and stress response. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS Screening will be conducted with assistance from an artificial intelligence application. Two independent reviewers for each data stream (human, animal) will screen studies with highest predicted relevance against pre-specified inclusion criteria at the title/abstract and full-text level. Study evaluation will be conducted using methods adapted from the U.S. EPA IRIS program. After data extraction, we will conduct a narrative review and quantitative meta-analysis on the human epidemiological studies as well as a narrative review of the experimental animal studies. We will evaluate the strength of each evidence stream separately and then will develop a summary evidence integration statement based on inference across evidence streams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M Shaffer
- US Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, and Research Triangle Park, NC, United States
| | - Jenna E Forsyth
- Stanford University, Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford, CA, United States
| | - Greg Ferraro
- North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, United States
| | | | - Laura M Carlson
- US Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, and Research Triangle Park, NC, United States
| | - Kirstin Hester
- US Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, and Research Triangle Park, NC, United States
| | - Amanda Haddock
- US Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, and Research Triangle Park, NC, United States
| | - Jenna Strawbridge
- Oak Ridge Associated Universities, US Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States
| | - Charles C Lanfear
- Nuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, United Kingdom
| | - Howard Hu
- Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States
| | - Ellen Kirrane
- US Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, and Research Triangle Park, NC, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
McPartland J, Shaffer RM, Fox MA, Nachman KE, Burke TA, Denison RA. Charting a Path Forward: Assessing the Science of Chemical Risk Evaluations under the Toxic Substances Control Act in the Context of Recent National Academies Recommendations. Environ Health Perspect 2022; 130:25003. [PMID: 35195451 PMCID: PMC8865089 DOI: 10.1289/ehp9649] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2016, Congress enacted the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act ("the Lautenberg Act"), which made major revisions to the main U.S. chemical safety law, the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Among other reforms, the Lautenberg Act mandates that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) conduct comprehensive risk evaluations of chemicals in commerce. The U.S. EPA recently finalized the first set of such chemical risk evaluations. OBJECTIVES We examine the first 10 TSCA risk evaluations in relation to risk science recommendations from the National Academies to determine consistency with these recommendations and to identify opportunities to improve future TSCA risk evaluations by further implementing these key approaches and methods. DISCUSSION Our review of the first set of TSCA risk evaluations identified substantial deviations from best practices in risk assessment, including overly narrow problem formulations and scopes; insufficient characterization of uncertainty in the evidence; inadequate consideration of population variability; lack of consideration of background exposures, combined exposures, and cumulative risk; divergent approaches to dose-response assessment for carcinogens and noncarcinogens; and a flawed approach to systematic review. We believe these deviations result in underestimation of population exposures and health risks. We are hopeful that the agency can use these insights and have provided suggestions to produce chemical risk evaluations aligned with the intent and requirements of the Lautenberg Act and the best available science to better protect health and the environment-including the health of those most vulnerable to chemical exposures. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9649.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Rachel M. Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Mary A. Fox
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Johns Hopkins Risk Sciences and Public Policy Institute, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Keeve E. Nachman
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Johns Hopkins Risk Sciences and Public Policy Institute, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Thomas A. Burke
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Johns Hopkins Risk Sciences and Public Policy Institute, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Shaffer RM. Environmental Health Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: A Visual Overview and a Renewed Call for Coordination. Environ Sci Technol 2021; 55:10923-10927. [PMID: 34310109 PMCID: PMC8530530 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c01955] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/14/2023]
Abstract
In the United States (U.S.), chemical evaluations and assessments are conducted by seven federal agencies responding to distinct statutory requirements and focusing on different exposure scenarios. While risk assessment is a fundamental concept in public health practice and policy, there is no clear, central, and concise summary of these processes. The novel infographic presented here depicts more than 30 different evaluation and assessment processes conducted by federal agencies for chemicals found in the environment, workplace, consumer products, hazardous waste sites, food, and/or cosmetics. The majority of these assessments are statutorily required. Most serve as sources of authoritative information to provide public health guidance or recommendations. Less than half directly result in risk management actions or regulations. Understanding these roles and processes can facilitate engagement from the broader community, including by highlighting priority areas for research to inform public health policy. This infographic also illustrates the opportunity and need for further intra- and interagency collaboration and coordination - including a particular focus on aggregate risk assessment, given that the population regularly experiences exposures from multiple sources crossing agency domains.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, 3980 15th Avenue, Seattle, 98195, United States
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Shaffer RM, Blanco MN, Li G, Adar SD, Carone M, Szpiro AA, Kaufman JD, Larson TV, Larson EB, Crane PK, Sheppard L. Fine Particulate Matter and Dementia Incidence in the Adult Changes in Thought Study. Environ Health Perspect 2021; 129:87001. [PMID: 34347531 PMCID: PMC8336685 DOI: 10.1289/ehp9018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Air pollution may be associated with elevated dementia risk. Prior research has limitations that may affect reliability, and no studies have evaluated this question in a population-based cohort of men and women in the United States. OBJECTIVES We evaluated the association between time-varying, 10-y average fine particulate matter (PM2.5) exposure and hazard of all-cause dementia. An additional goal was to understand how to adequately control for age and calendar-time-related confounding through choice of the time axis and covariate adjustment. METHODS Using the Adult Changes in Thought (ACT) population-based prospective cohort study in Seattle, we linked spatiotemporal model-based PM2.5 exposures to participant addresses from 1978 to 2018. Dementia diagnoses were made using high-quality, standardized, consensus-based protocols at biennial follow-ups. We conducted multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to evaluate the association between time-varying, 10-y average PM2.5 exposure and time to event in a model with age as the time axis, stratified by apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype, and adjusted for sex, education, race, neighborhood median household income, and calendar time. Alternative models used calendar time as the time axis. RESULTS We report 1,136 cases of incident dementia among 4,166 individuals with nonmissing APOE status. Mean [mean ± standard deviation (SD)] 10-y average PM2.5 was 10.1 (±2.9) μg/m3. Each 1-μg/m3 increase in the moving average of 10-y PM2.5 was associated with a 16% greater hazard of all-cause dementia [1.16 (95% confidence interval: 1.03, 1.31)]. Results using calendar time as the time axis were similar. DISCUSSION In this prospective cohort study with extensive exposure data and consensus-based outcome ascertainment, elevated long-term exposure to PM2.5 was associated with increased hazard of all-cause dementia. We found that optimal control of age and time confounding could be achieved through use of either age or calendar time as the time axis in our study. Our results strengthen evidence on the neurodegenerative effects of PM2.5. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M. Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Magali N. Blanco
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Ge Li
- VA Northwest Network Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Virginia Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Virginia Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Sara D. Adar
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Marco Carone
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Adam A. Szpiro
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Joel D. Kaufman
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Timothy V. Larson
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Eric B. Larson
- School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Paul K. Crane
- School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Lianne Sheppard
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Affiliation(s)
- Sindana D Ilango
- School of Public Health, San Diego State University, San Diego, California.,Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California San Diego, La Jolla
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Shaffer RM, Li G, Adar SD, Dirk Keene C, Latimer CS, Crane PK, Larson EB, Kaufman JD, Carone M, Sheppard L. Fine Particulate Matter and Markers of Alzheimer's Disease Neuropathology at Autopsy in a Community-Based Cohort. J Alzheimers Dis 2021; 79:1761-1773. [PMID: 33459717 PMCID: PMC8061707 DOI: 10.3233/jad-201005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evidence links fine particulate matter (PM2.5) to Alzheimer's disease (AD), but no community-based prospective cohort studies in older adults have evaluated the association between long-term exposure to PM2.5 and markers of AD neuropathology at autopsy. OBJECTIVE Using a well-established autopsy cohort and new spatiotemporal predictions of air pollution, we evaluated associations of 10-year PM2.5 exposure prior to death with Braak stage, Consortium to Establish a Registry for AD (CERAD) score, and combined AD neuropathologic change (ABC score). METHODS We used autopsy specimens (N = 832) from the Adult Changes in Thought (ACT) study, with enrollment ongoing since 1994. We assigned long-term exposure at residential address based on two-week average concentrations from a newly developed spatiotemporal model. To account for potential selection bias, we conducted inverse probability weighting. Adjusting for covariates with tiered models, we performed ordinal regression for Braak and CERAD and logistic regression for dichotomized ABC score. RESULTS 10-year average (SD) PM2.5 from death across the autopsy cohort was 8.2 (1.9) μg/m3. Average age (SD) at death was 89 (7) years. Each 1μg/m3 increase in 10-year average PM2.5 prior to death was associated with a suggestive increase in the odds of worse neuropathology as indicated by CERAD score (OR: 1.35 (0.90, 1.90)) but a suggestive decreased odds of neuropathology as defined by the ABC score (OR: 0.79 (0.49, 1.19)). There was no association with Braak stage (OR: 0.99 (0.64, 1.47)). CONCLUSION We report inconclusive associations between PM2.5 and AD neuropathology at autopsy among a cohort where 94% of individuals experienced 10-year exposures below the current EPA standard. Prior studies of AD risk factors and AD neuropathology are similarly inconclusive, suggesting alternative mechanistic pathways for disease or residual confounding.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M. Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Ge Li
- VA Northwest Network Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Sara D. Adar
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - C. Dirk Keene
- Division of Neuropathology, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Caitlin S. Latimer
- Division of Neuropathology, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Paul K. Crane
- School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Eric B. Larson
- School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
- Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Joel D. Kaufman
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA
- Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Marco Carone
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Lianne Sheppard
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Shaffer RM, Sheppard L, Peskind ER, Zhang J, Adar SD, Li G. Fine Particulate Matter Exposure and Cerebrospinal Fluid Markers of Vascular Injury. J Alzheimers Dis 2020; 71:1015-1025. [PMID: 31476158 DOI: 10.3233/jad-190563] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cerebrovascular diseases play an important role in dementia. Air pollution is associated with cardiovascular disease, with growing links to neurodegeneration. Prior studies demonstrate associations between fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and biomarkers of endothelial injury in the blood; however, no studies have evaluated these biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). OBJECTIVE We evaluate associations between short-term and long-term PM2.5 exposure with CSF vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1) and e-selectin in cognitively normal and mild cognitive impairment (MCI)/Alzheimer's disease (AD) individuals. METHODS We collected CSF from 133 community volunteers at VA Puget Sound between 2001-2012. We assigned short-term PM2.5 from central monitors and long-term PM2.5 based on annual average exposure predictions linked to participant addresses. We performed analyses stratified by cognitive status and adjusted for key covariates with tiered models. Our primary exposure windows for the short-term and long-term analyses were 7-day and 1-year averages, respectively. RESULTS Among cognitively normal individuals, a 5 μg/m3 increase in 7-day and 1-year average PM2.5 was associated with elevated VCAM-1 (7-day: 35.4 (9.7, 61.1) ng/ml; 1-year: 51.8 (6.5, 97.1) ng/ml). A 5 μg/m3 increase in 1-year average PM2.5, but not 7-day average, was associated with elevated e-selectin (53.3 (11.0, 95.5) pg/ml). We found no consistent associations among MCI/AD individuals. CONCLUSIONS We report associations between short-term and long term PM2.5 and CSF biomarkers of vascular damage in cognitively normal adults. These results are aligned with prior research linking PM2.5 to vascular damage in other biofluids as well as emerging evidence of the role of PM2.5 in neurodegeneration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Lianne Sheppard
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Elaine R Peskind
- VA Northwest Network Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA.,Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jing Zhang
- Department of Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Sara D Adar
- Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, WA, USA
| | - Ge Li
- VA Northwest Network Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA.,Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.,Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Shaffer RM, Sellers SP, Baker MG, de Buen Kalman R, Frostad J, Suter MK, Anenberg SC, Balbus J, Basu N, Bellinger DC, Birnbaum L, Brauer M, Cohen A, Ebi KL, Fuller R, Grandjean P, Hess JJ, Kogevinas M, Kumar P, Landrigan PJ, Lanphear B, London SJ, Rooney AA, Stanaway JD, Trasande L, Walker K, Hu H. Improving and Expanding Estimates of the Global Burden of Disease Due to Environmental Health Risk Factors. Environ Health Perspect 2019; 127:105001. [PMID: 31626566 PMCID: PMC6867191 DOI: 10.1289/ehp5496] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2019] [Revised: 08/20/2019] [Accepted: 09/25/2019] [Indexed: 05/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study, coordinated by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), produces influential, data-driven estimates of the burden of disease and premature death due to major risk factors. Expanded quantification of disease due to environmental health (EH) risk factors, including climate change, will enhance accuracy of GBD estimates, which will contribute to developing cost-effective policies that promote prevention and achieving Sustainable Development Goals. OBJECTIVES We review key aspects of the GBD for the EH community and introduce the Global Burden of Disease-Pollution and Health Initiative (GBD-PHI), which aims to work with IHME and the GBD study to improve estimates of disease burden attributable to EH risk factors and to develop an innovative approach to estimating climate-related disease burden-both current and projected. METHODS We discuss strategies for improving GBD quantification of specific EH risk factors, including air pollution, lead, and climate change. We highlight key methodological challenges, including new EH risk factors, notably evidence rating and global exposure assessment. DISCUSSION A number of issues present challenges to the scope and accuracy of current GBD estimates for EH risk factors. For air pollution, minimal data exist on the exposure-risk relationships associated with high levels of pollution; epidemiological studies in high pollution regions should be a research priority. For lead, the GBD's current methods do not fully account for lead's impact on neurodevelopment; innovative methods to account for subclinical effects are needed. Decisions on inclusion of additional EH risk-outcome pairs need to be guided by findings of systematic reviews, the size of exposed populations, feasibility of global exposure estimates, and predicted trends in exposures and diseases. Neurotoxicants, endocrine-disrupting chemicals, and climate-related factors should be high priorities for incorporation into upcoming iterations of the GBD study. Enhancing the scope and methods will improve the GBD's estimates and better guide prevention policy. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP5496.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M. Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Samuel P. Sellers
- Center for Health and the Global Environment, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Marissa G. Baker
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Rebeca de Buen Kalman
- Evans School of Public Policy and Governance, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Joseph Frostad
- Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Health Metrics Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Megan K. Suter
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Susan C. Anenberg
- Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA
| | - John Balbus
- Office of the Director, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Niladri Basu
- Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - David C. Bellinger
- Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Linda Birnbaum
- Office of the Director, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
| | - Michael Brauer
- Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- School of Population and Public Health, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Aaron Cohen
- Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Health Effects Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Kristie L. Ebi
- Center for Health and the Global Environment, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | - Philippe Grandjean
- Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Jeremy J. Hess
- Center for Health and the Global Environment, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | - Pushpam Kumar
- United Nations Programme on the Environment, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Philip J. Landrigan
- Program in Global Public Health and the Common Good, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA
- Global Observatory on Pollution and Health, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Bruce Lanphear
- Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stephanie J. London
- Epidemiology Branch, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
| | - Andrew A. Rooney
- Division of the National Toxicology Program, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
| | - Jeffrey D. Stanaway
- Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Leonardo Trasande
- Department of Pediatrics, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
- NYU Global Institute of Public Health, New York University, New York, New York, USA
| | - Katherine Walker
- School of Population and Public Health, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Howard Hu
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Zhang L, Rana I, Shaffer RM, Taioli E, Sheppard L. Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence. Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res 2019; 781:186-206. [PMID: 31342895 PMCID: PMC6706269 DOI: 10.1016/j.mrrev.2019.02.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 125] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2018] [Revised: 02/02/2019] [Accepted: 02/05/2019] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
Glyphosate is the most widely used broad-spectrum systemic herbicide in the world. Recent evaluations of the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) by various regional, national, and international agencies have engendered controversy. We investigated whether there was an association between high cumulative exposures to GBHs and increased risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in humans. We conducted a new meta-analysis that includes the most recent update of the Agricultural Health Study (AHS) cohort published in 2018 along with five case-control studies. Using the highest exposure groups when available in each study, we report the overall meta-relative risk (meta-RR) of NHL in GBH-exposed individuals was increased by 41% (meta-RR = 1.41, 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.13-1.75). For comparison, we also performed a secondary meta-analysis using high-exposure groups with the earlier AHS (2005), and we calculated a meta-RR for NHL of 1.45 (95% CI: 1.11-1.91), which was higher than the meta-RRs reported previously. Multiple sensitivity tests conducted to assess the validity of our findings did not reveal meaningful differences from our primary estimated meta-RR. To contextualize our findings of an increased NHL risk in individuals with high GBH exposure, we reviewed publicly available animal and mechanistic studies related to lymphoma. We documented further support from studies of malignant lymphoma incidence in mice treated with pure glyphosate, as well as potential links between glyphosate / GBH exposure and immunosuppression, endocrine disruption, and genetic alterations that are commonly associated with NHL or lymphomagenesis. Overall, in accordance with findings from experimental animal and mechanistic studies, our current meta-analysis of human epidemiological studies suggests a compelling link between exposures to GBHs and increased risk for NHL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luoping Zhang
- Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, USA.
| | - Iemaan Rana
- Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, USA
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| | - Emanuela Taioli
- Institute for Translational Epidemiology and Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA
| | - Lianne Sheppard
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, USA; Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Shaffer RM, Ferguson KK, Sheppard L, James-Todd T, Butts S, Chandrasekaran S, Swan SH, Barrett ES, Nguyen R, Bush N, McElrath TF, Sathyanarayana S. Maternal urinary phthalate metabolites in relation to gestational diabetes and glucose intolerance during pregnancy. Environ Int 2019; 123:588-596. [PMID: 30622083 PMCID: PMC6347428 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.12.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 68] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2018] [Revised: 12/11/2018] [Accepted: 12/11/2018] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Phthalates are common plasticizer chemicals that have been linked to glucose intolerance in the general population, but there is only limited research on their association with gestational diabetes (GDM). OBJECTIVE We evaluated the association between 11 urinary phthalate metabolites and GDM, impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and continuous blood glucose concentration during pregnancy in The Infant Development and Environment Study (TIDES). Based on prior study results, our primary analyses focused on monoethyl phthalate (MEP) in relation to our outcomes of interest. STUDY DESIGN We used multi-variable logistic regression to examine the odds of GDM and IGT in relation to an interquartile-range (IQR) increase in natural log (ln)-transformed, specific gravity (SG)-adjusted first trimester (T1) and average of T1 and third trimester (T3) ("T1T3avg") phthalate metabolite concentrations. We fit linear regression models to examine the percent change in blood glucose per IQR increase in ln-transformed, SG-adjusted T1 and T1T3avg phthalates. In sensitivity analyses, we examined interactions between exposure and race. We adjusted for maternal age, maternal body mass index, study center, race/ethnicity, parity, and gestational age at glucose testing. RESULTS In our sample of 705 pregnant women, we observed 60 cases of GDM, 90 cases of IGT, and an average GLT blood glucose of 113.6 ± 27.7 mg/dL. In our primary analysis, T1T3avg MEP was positively associated with GDM ([OR (95% CI) per IQR increase] T1T3avg MEP: 1.61 (1.10, 2.36)). In secondary analyses, most other phthalates were not found to be related to study outcomes, though some associations were noted. Sensitivity analyses indicated possible strong race-specific associations in Asians, though these results are based on a small sample size (n = 35). CONCLUSION In alignment with our a priori selection, we documented an association between T1T3avg MEP and GDM. Additional phthalate metabolites were also found to be linked to glucose intolerance, with possible stronger associations in certain racial/ethnic subgroups. Given the prevalence of phthalate exposures and the growing evidence of associations with metabolic outcomes, future studies should continue to examine this question in diverse cohorts of pregnant women, particularly in those who may be at higher risk for GDM and IGT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
| | - Kelly K Ferguson
- Epidemiology Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Lianne Sheppard
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Tamarra James-Todd
- Departments of Environmental Health and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; Division of Women's Health, Department of Medicine, Connors Center for Women's Health and Gender Biology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Samantha Butts
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Suchitra Chandrasekaran
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Shanna H Swan
- Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Emily S Barrett
- Department of Epidemiology, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Ruby Nguyen
- Department of Epidemiology and Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Nicole Bush
- Department of Psychiatry and Pediatrics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Thomas F McElrath
- Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Sheela Sathyanarayana
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Sheppard L, Shaffer RM. Re: Glyphosate Use and Cancer Incidence in the Agricultural Health Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2019; 111:214-215. [PMID: 30597026 PMCID: PMC6376901 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djy200] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2018] [Revised: 10/17/2018] [Accepted: 10/17/2018] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Lianne Sheppard
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Gillezeau C, van Gerwen M, Shaffer RM, Rana I, Zhang L, Sheppard L, Taioli E. The evidence of human exposure to glyphosate: a review. Environ Health 2019; 18:2. [PMID: 30612564 PMCID: PMC6322310 DOI: 10.1186/s12940-018-0435-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 168] [Impact Index Per Article: 33.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2018] [Accepted: 12/03/2018] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the growing and widespread use of glyphosate, a broad-spectrum herbicide and desiccant, very few studies have evaluated the extent and amount of human exposure. OBJECTIVE We review documented levels of human exposure among workers in occupational settings and the general population. METHODS We conducted a review of scientific publications on glyphosate levels in humans; 19 studies were identified, of which five investigated occupational exposure to glyphosate, 11 documented the exposure in general populations, and three reported on both. RESULTS Eight studies reported urinary levels in 423 occupationally and para-occupationally exposed subjects; 14 studies reported glyphosate levels in various biofluids on 3298 subjects from the general population. Average urinary levels in occupationally exposed subjects varied from 0.26 to 73.5 μg/L; environmental exposure urinary levels ranged from 0.16 to 7.6 μg/L. Only two studies measured temporal trends in exposure, both of which show increasing proportions of individuals with detectable levels of glyphosate in their urine over time. CONCLUSIONS The current review highlights the paucity of data on glyphosate levels among individuals exposed occupationally, para-occupationally, or environmentally to the herbicide. As such, it is challenging to fully understand the extent of exposure overall and in vulnerable populations such as children. We recommend further work to evaluate exposure across populations and geographic regions, apportion the exposure sources (e.g., occupational, household use, food residues), and understand temporal trends.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina Gillezeau
- Institute for Translational Epidemiology and Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave L. Levy Place, Box 1133, New York, NY 10029 USA
| | - Maaike van Gerwen
- Institute for Translational Epidemiology and Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave L. Levy Place, Box 1133, New York, NY 10029 USA
| | - Rachel M. Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
| | - Iemaan Rana
- Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, 2121 Berkeley Way, Room 5302, Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 USA
| | - Luoping Zhang
- Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, 2121 Berkeley Way, Room 5302, Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 USA
| | - Lianne Sheppard
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific St, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Box 357232, Seattle, WA 98195-7232 USA
| | - Emanuela Taioli
- Institute for Translational Epidemiology and Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, One Gustave L. Levy Place, Box 1133, New York, NY 10029 USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Abstract
Increasing scientific evidence suggests potential adverse effects on children's health from synthetic chemicals used as food additives, both those deliberately added to food during processing (direct) and those used in materials that may contaminate food as part of packaging or manufacturing (indirect). Concern regarding food additives has increased in the past 2 decades in part because of studies that increasingly document endocrine disruption and other adverse health effects. In some cases, exposure to these chemicals is disproportionate among minority and low-income populations. This report focuses on those food additives with the strongest scientific evidence for concern. Further research is needed to study effects of exposure over various points in the life course, and toxicity testing must be advanced to be able to better identify health concerns prior to widespread population exposure. The accompanying policy statement describes approaches policy makers and pediatricians can take to prevent the disease and disability that are increasingly being identified in relation to chemicals used as food additives, among other uses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leonardo Trasande
- Departments of Pediatrics, Environmental Medicine, and Health Policy, School of Medicine, New York University, New York, New York
| | - Rachel M. Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Sheela Sathyanarayana
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Abstract
Our purposes with this policy statement and its accompanying technical report are to review and highlight emerging child health concerns related to the use of colorings, flavorings, and chemicals deliberately added to food during processing (direct food additives) as well as substances in food contact materials, including adhesives, dyes, coatings, paper, paperboard, plastic, and other polymers, which may contaminate food as part of packaging or manufacturing equipment (indirect food additives); to make reasonable recommendations that the pediatrician might be able to adopt into the guidance provided during pediatric visits; and to propose urgently needed reforms to the current regulatory process at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for food additives. Concern regarding food additives has increased in the past 2 decades, in part because of studies in which authors document endocrine disruption and other adverse health effects. In some cases, exposure to these chemicals is disproportionate among minority and low-income populations. Regulation and oversight of many food additives is inadequate because of several key problems in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Current requirements for a "generally recognized as safe" (GRAS) designation are insufficient to ensure the safety of food additives and do not contain sufficient protections against conflict of interest. Additionally, the FDA does not have adequate authority to acquire data on chemicals on the market or reassess their safety for human health. These are critical weaknesses in the current regulatory system for food additives. Data about health effects of food additives on infants and children are limited or missing; however, in general, infants and children are more vulnerable to chemical exposures. Substantial improvements to the food additives regulatory system are urgently needed, including greatly strengthening or replacing the "generally recognized as safe" (GRAS) determination process, updating the scientific foundation of the FDA's safety assessment program, retesting all previously approved chemicals, and labeling direct additives with limited or no toxicity data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leonardo Trasande
- Pediatrics, Environmental Medicine, and Health Policy, School of Medicine, New York University, New York, New York
| | - Rachel M. Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | - Sheela Sathyanarayana
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
- Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Shaffer RM, Gilbert SG. Reducing occupational lead exposures: Strengthened standards for a healthy workforce. Neurotoxicology 2017; 69:181-186. [PMID: 29128313 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuro.2017.10.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2017] [Revised: 10/30/2017] [Accepted: 10/31/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Outdated federal and state occupational lead standards leave workers and their families vulnerable to the adverse effects of lead. Standards should be updated to reflect the best available scientific and medical evidence, which documents harm to multiple organ systems even at low levels of exposure. This commentary will review the inadequacies of existing policies, highlight susceptible populations, and briefly summarize state revision efforts to date. Federal policies must be strengthened to protect all workers and their families from this well-documented hazard.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, 4225 Roosevelt Way NE Suite 100, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98105, United States
| | - Steven G Gilbert
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington Seattle School of Public Health, 4225 Roosevelt Way NE Suite 100, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98105, United States; Institute of Neurotoxicology and Neurological Disorders (INND), 3711 47th Place NE, Seattle, WA, 98105, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Shaffer RM, Smith MN, Faustman EM. Developing the Regulatory Utility of the Exposome: Mapping Exposures for Risk Assessment through Lifestage Exposome Snapshots (LEnS). Environ Health Perspect 2017; 125:085003. [PMID: 28796633 PMCID: PMC5783662 DOI: 10.1289/ehp1250] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2016] [Revised: 03/08/2017] [Accepted: 04/04/2017] [Indexed: 05/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Exposome-related efforts aim to document the totality of human exposures across the lifecourse. This field has advanced rapidly in recent years but lacks practical application to risk assessment, particularly for children's health. OBJECTIVES Our objective was to apply the exposome to children's health risk assessment by introducing the concept of Lifestage Exposome Snapshots (LEnS). Case studies are presented to illustrate the value of the framework. DISCUSSION The LEnS framework encourages organization of exposome studies based on windows of susceptibility for particular target organ systems. Such analyses will provide information regarding cumulative impacts during specific critical periods of the life course. A logical extension of this framework is that regulatory standards should analyze exposure information by target organ, rather than for a single chemical only or multiple chemicals grouped solely by mechanism of action. CONCLUSIONS The LEnS concept is a practical refinement to the exposome that accounts for total exposures during particular windows of susceptibility in target organ systems. Application of the LEnS framework in risk assessment and regulation will improve protection of children's health by enhancing protection of sensitive developing organ systems that are critical for lifelong health and well-being. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1250.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington, USA
- Institute for Risk Analysis and Risk Communication, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Marissa N Smith
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington, USA
- Institute for Risk Analysis and Risk Communication, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Elaine M Faustman
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington, USA
- Institute for Risk Analysis and Risk Communication, University of Washington , Seattle, Washington, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Chang SY, Voellinger JL, Van Ness KP, Chapron B, Shaffer RM, Neumann T, White CC, Kavanagh TJ, Kelly EJ, Eaton DL. Characterization of rat or human hepatocytes cultured in microphysiological systems (MPS) to identify hepatotoxicity. Toxicol In Vitro 2017; 40:170-183. [PMID: 28089783 DOI: 10.1016/j.tiv.2017.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2016] [Revised: 01/05/2017] [Accepted: 01/11/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
The liver is the main site for drug and xenobiotics metabolism, including inactivation or bioactivation. In order to improve the predictability of drug safety and efficacy in clinical development, and to facilitate the evaluation of the potential human health effects from exposure to environmental contaminants, there is a critical need to accurately model human organ systems such as the liver in vitro. We are developing a microphysiological system (MPS) based on a new commercial microfluidic platform (Nortis, Inc.) that can utilize primary liver cells from multiple species (e.g., rat and human). Compared to conventional monolayer cell culture, which typically survives for 5-7days or less, primary rat or human hepatocytes in an MPS exhibited higher viability and improved hepatic functions, such as albumin production, expression of hepatocyte marker HNF4α and canaliculi structure, for up to 14days. Additionally, induction of Cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A and 3A4 in cryopreserved human hepatocytes was observed in the MPS. The acute cytotoxicity of the potent hepatotoxic and hepatocarcinogen, aflatoxin B1, was evaluated in human hepatocytes cultured in an MPS, demonstrating the utility of this model for acute hepatotoxicity assessment. These results indicate that MPS-cultured hepatocytes provide a promising approach for evaluating chemical toxicity in vitro.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shih-Yu Chang
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Jenna L Voellinger
- Department of Pharmaceutics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Kirk P Van Ness
- Department of Pharmaceutics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Brian Chapron
- Department of Pharmaceutics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | | | - Collin C White
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Terrance J Kavanagh
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - Edward J Kelly
- Department of Pharmaceutics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
| | - David L Eaton
- Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Jarema KA, Hunter DL, Shaffer RM, Behl M, Padilla S. Acute and developmental behavioral effects of flame retardants and related chemicals in zebrafish. Neurotoxicol Teratol 2015; 52:194-209. [PMID: 26348672 DOI: 10.1016/j.ntt.2015.08.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 122] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2015] [Revised: 08/06/2015] [Accepted: 08/31/2015] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
As polybrominated diphenyl ethers are phased out, numerous compounds are emerging as potential replacement flame retardants for use in consumer and electronic products. Little is known, however, about the neurobehavioral toxicity of these replacements. This study evaluated the neurobehavioral effects of acute or developmental exposure to t-butylphenyl diphenyl phosphate (BPDP), 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate (EHDP), isodecyl diphenyl phosphate (IDDP), isopropylated phenyl phosphate (IPP), tricresyl phosphate (TMPP; also abbreviated TCP), triphenyl phosphate (TPHP; also abbreviated TPP), tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), tris (2-chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP), tris (1,3-dichloroisopropyl) phosphate (TDCIPP; also abbreviated TDCPP), tri-o-cresyl phosphate (TOCP), and 2,2-,4,4'-tetrabromodiphenyl ether (BDE-47) in zebrafish (Danio rerio) larvae. Larvae (n≈24 per dose per compound) were exposed to test compounds (0.4-120 μM) at sub-teratogenic concentrations either developmentally or acutely, and locomotor activity was assessed at 6 days post fertilization. When given developmentally, all chemicals except BPDP, IDDP and TBBPA produced behavioral effects. When given acutely, all chemicals produced behavioral effects, with TPHP, TBBPA, EHDP, IPP, and BPDP eliciting the most effects at the most concentrations. The results indicate that these replacement flame retardants may have developmental or pharmacological effects on the vertebrate nervous system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kimberly A Jarema
- Toxicology Assessment Division NHEERL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Deborah L Hunter
- Integrated Systems Toxicology Division, NHEERL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Rachel M Shaffer
- Integrated Systems Toxicology Division, NHEERL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA; Curriculum in Toxicology, University of North Carolina, School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Mamta Behl
- National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - Stephanie Padilla
- Integrated Systems Toxicology Division, NHEERL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
| |
Collapse
|