Cargando…
Assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using NHANES arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data
BACKGROUND: There are numerous methods for adjusting measured concentrations of urinary biomarkers for hydration variation. Few studies use objective criteria to quantify the relative performance of these methods. Our aim was to compare the performance of existing methods for adjusting urinary bioma...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4902931/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27286873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12940-016-0152-x |
_version_ | 1782437045437726720 |
---|---|
author | Middleton, Daniel R. S. Watts, Michael J. Lark, R. Murray Milne, Chris J. Polya, David A. |
author_facet | Middleton, Daniel R. S. Watts, Michael J. Lark, R. Murray Milne, Chris J. Polya, David A. |
author_sort | Middleton, Daniel R. S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: There are numerous methods for adjusting measured concentrations of urinary biomarkers for hydration variation. Few studies use objective criteria to quantify the relative performance of these methods. Our aim was to compare the performance of existing methods for adjusting urinary biomarkers for hydration variation. METHODS: Creatinine, osmolality, excretion rate (ER), bodyweight adjusted ER (ERBW) and empirical analyte-specific urinary flow rate (UFR) adjustment methods on spot urinary concentrations of lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), non-arsenobetaine arsenic (As(IMM)) and iodine (I) from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (2009–2010 and 2011–2012) were evaluated. The data were divided into a training dataset (n = 1,723) from which empirical adjustment coefficients were derived and a testing dataset (n = 428) on which quantification of the performance of the adjustment methods was done by calculating, primarily, the correlation of the adjusted parameter with UFR, with lower correlations indicating better performance and, secondarily, the correlation of the adjusted parameters with blood analyte concentrations (Pb and Cd), with higher correlations indicating better performance. RESULTS: Overall performance across analytes was better for Osmolality and UFR based methods. Excretion rate and ERBW consistently performed worse, often no better than unadjusted concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Osmolality adjustment of urinary biomonitoring data provides for more robust adjustment than either creatinine based or ER or ERBW methods, the latter two of which tend to overcompensate for UFR. Modified UFR methods perform significantly better than all but osmolality in removing hydration variation, but depend on the accuracy of UFR calculations. Hydration adjustment performance is analyte-specific and further research is needed to establish a robust and consistent framework. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12940-016-0152-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4902931 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49029312016-06-12 Assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using NHANES arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data Middleton, Daniel R. S. Watts, Michael J. Lark, R. Murray Milne, Chris J. Polya, David A. Environ Health Research BACKGROUND: There are numerous methods for adjusting measured concentrations of urinary biomarkers for hydration variation. Few studies use objective criteria to quantify the relative performance of these methods. Our aim was to compare the performance of existing methods for adjusting urinary biomarkers for hydration variation. METHODS: Creatinine, osmolality, excretion rate (ER), bodyweight adjusted ER (ERBW) and empirical analyte-specific urinary flow rate (UFR) adjustment methods on spot urinary concentrations of lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), non-arsenobetaine arsenic (As(IMM)) and iodine (I) from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (2009–2010 and 2011–2012) were evaluated. The data were divided into a training dataset (n = 1,723) from which empirical adjustment coefficients were derived and a testing dataset (n = 428) on which quantification of the performance of the adjustment methods was done by calculating, primarily, the correlation of the adjusted parameter with UFR, with lower correlations indicating better performance and, secondarily, the correlation of the adjusted parameters with blood analyte concentrations (Pb and Cd), with higher correlations indicating better performance. RESULTS: Overall performance across analytes was better for Osmolality and UFR based methods. Excretion rate and ERBW consistently performed worse, often no better than unadjusted concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Osmolality adjustment of urinary biomonitoring data provides for more robust adjustment than either creatinine based or ER or ERBW methods, the latter two of which tend to overcompensate for UFR. Modified UFR methods perform significantly better than all but osmolality in removing hydration variation, but depend on the accuracy of UFR calculations. Hydration adjustment performance is analyte-specific and further research is needed to establish a robust and consistent framework. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12940-016-0152-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4902931/ /pubmed/27286873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12940-016-0152-x Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Middleton, Daniel R. S. Watts, Michael J. Lark, R. Murray Milne, Chris J. Polya, David A. Assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using NHANES arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data |
title | Assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using NHANES arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data |
title_full | Assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using NHANES arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data |
title_fullStr | Assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using NHANES arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using NHANES arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data |
title_short | Assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using NHANES arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data |
title_sort | assessing urinary flow rate, creatinine, osmolality and other hydration adjustment methods for urinary biomonitoring using nhanes arsenic, iodine, lead and cadmium data |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4902931/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27286873 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12940-016-0152-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT middletondanielrs assessingurinaryflowratecreatinineosmolalityandotherhydrationadjustmentmethodsforurinarybiomonitoringusingnhanesarseniciodineleadandcadmiumdata AT wattsmichaelj assessingurinaryflowratecreatinineosmolalityandotherhydrationadjustmentmethodsforurinarybiomonitoringusingnhanesarseniciodineleadandcadmiumdata AT larkrmurray assessingurinaryflowratecreatinineosmolalityandotherhydrationadjustmentmethodsforurinarybiomonitoringusingnhanesarseniciodineleadandcadmiumdata AT milnechrisj assessingurinaryflowratecreatinineosmolalityandotherhydrationadjustmentmethodsforurinarybiomonitoringusingnhanesarseniciodineleadandcadmiumdata AT polyadavida assessingurinaryflowratecreatinineosmolalityandotherhydrationadjustmentmethodsforurinarybiomonitoringusingnhanesarseniciodineleadandcadmiumdata |