Dataset Information

Peak Exposures in Epidemiologic Studies and Cancer Risks: Considerations for Regulatory Risk Assessment.

ABSTRACT: We review approaches for characterizing "peak" exposures in epidemiologic studies and methods for incorporating peak exposure metrics in dose-response assessments that contribute to risk assessment. The focus was on potential etiologic relations between environmental chemical exposures and cancer risks. We searched the epidemiologic literature on environmental chemicals classified as carcinogens in which cancer risks were described in relation to "peak" exposures. These articles were evaluated to identify some of the challenges associated with defining and describing cancer risks in relation to peak exposures. We found that definitions of peak exposure varied considerably across studies. Of nine chemical agents included in our review of peak exposure, six had epidemiologic data used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) in dose-response assessments to derive inhalation unit risk values. These were benzene, formaldehyde, styrene, trichloroethylene, acrylonitrile, and ethylene oxide. All derived unit risks relied on cumulative exposure for dose-response estimation and none, to our knowledge, considered peak exposure metrics. This is not surprising, given the historical linear no-threshold default model (generally based on cumulative exposure) used in regulatory risk assessments. With newly proposed US EPA rule language, fuller consideration of alternative exposure and dose-response metrics will be supported. "Peak" exposure has not been consistently defined and rarely has been evaluated in epidemiologic studies of cancer risks. We recommend developing uniform definitions of "peak" exposure to facilitate fuller evaluation of dose response for environmental chemicals and cancer risks, especially where mechanistic understanding indicates that the dose response is unlikely linear and that short-term high-intensity exposures increase risk.

SUBMITTER: Checkoway H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6850123 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Peak Exposures in Epidemiologic Studies and Cancer Risks: Considerations for Regulatory Risk Assessment.

Checkoway Harvey H Lees Peter S J PSJ Dell Linda D LD Gentry P Robinan PR Mundt Kenneth A KA

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis 20190329 7

We review approaches for characterizing "peak" exposures in epidemiologic studies and methods for incorporating peak exposure metrics in dose-response assessments that contribute to risk assessment. The focus was on potential etiologic relations between environmental chemical exposures and cancer risks. We searched the epidemiologic literature on environmental chemicals classified as carcinogens in which cancer risks were described in relation to "peak" exposures. These articles were evaluated t ...[more]

PMID: 30925210

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA major challenge in studies of etiologic heterogeneity in breast cancer has been the limited throughput, accuracy, and reproducibility of measuring tissue markers. Computerized image analysis systems may help address these concerns, but published reports of their use are limited. We assessed agreement between automated and pathologist scores of a diverse set of immunohistochemical assays done on breast cancer tissue microarrays (TMA).MethodsTMAs of 440 breast cancers previously stained for estrogen receptor (ER)-alpha, progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), ER-beta, and aromatase were independently scored by two pathologists and three automated systems (TMALab II, TMAx, and Ariol). Agreement between automated and pathologist scores of negative/positive was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) and weighted kappa statistics for categorical scores. We also investigated the correlation between immunohistochemical scores and mRNA expression levels.ResultsAgreement between pathologist and automated negative/positive and categorical scores was excellent for ER-alpha and PR (AUC range = 0.98-0.99; kappa range = 0.86-0.91). Lower levels of agreement were seen for ER-beta categorical scores (AUC = 0.99-1.0; kappa = 0.80-0.86) and both negative/positive and categorical scores for aromatase (AUC = 0.85-0.96; kappa = 0.41-0.67) and HER2 (AUC = 0.94-0.97; kappa = 0.53-0.72). For ER-alpha and PR, there was a strong correlation between mRNA levels and automated (rho = 0.67-0.74) and pathologist immunohistochemical scores (rho = 0.67-0.77). HER2 mRNA levels were more strongly correlated with pathologist (rho = 0.63) than automated immunohistochemical scores (rho = 0.41-0.49).ConclusionsAutomated analysis of immunohistochemical markers is a promising approach for scoring large numbers of breast cancer tissues in epidemiologic investigations. This would facilitate studies of etiologic heterogeneity, which ultimately may allow improved risk prediction and better prevention approaches.

Dataset Information

Peak Exposures in Epidemiologic Studies and Cancer Risks: Considerations for Regulatory Risk Assessment.

Publications

Peak Exposures in Epidemiologic Studies and Cancer Risks: Considerations for Regulatory Risk Assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets