Cargando…

Use of study-specific MOE-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments

There are unique challenges in estimating dose-response with chemicals that are associated with multiple health outcomes and numerous studies. Some studies are more suitable than others for quantitative dose-response analyses. For such chemicals, an efficient method of screening studies and endpoint...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hobbie, Kevin, Shao, Kan, Henning, Cara, Mendez, William, Lee, Janice S., Cote, Ila, Druwe, Ingrid L., Davis, J. Allen, Gift, Jeffrey S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7572727/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32871380
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105986
_version_ 1783597359512420352
author Hobbie, Kevin
Shao, Kan
Henning, Cara
Mendez, William
Lee, Janice S.
Cote, Ila
Druwe, Ingrid L.
Davis, J. Allen
Gift, Jeffrey S.
author_facet Hobbie, Kevin
Shao, Kan
Henning, Cara
Mendez, William
Lee, Janice S.
Cote, Ila
Druwe, Ingrid L.
Davis, J. Allen
Gift, Jeffrey S.
author_sort Hobbie, Kevin
collection PubMed
description There are unique challenges in estimating dose-response with chemicals that are associated with multiple health outcomes and numerous studies. Some studies are more suitable than others for quantitative dose-response analyses. For such chemicals, an efficient method of screening studies and endpoints to identify suitable studies and potentially important health effects for dose-response modeling is valuable. Using inorganic arsenic as a test case, we developed a tiered approach that involves estimating study-specific margin of exposure (MOE)-like unitless ratios for two hypothetical scenarios. These study-specific unitless ratios are derived by dividing the exposure estimated to result in a 20% increase in relative risk over the background exposure (RRE(20)) by the background exposure, as estimated in two different ways. In our case study illustration, separate study-specific ratios are derived using estimates of United States population background exposure (RRB-US) and the mean study population reference group background exposure (RRB-SP). Systematic review methods were used to identify and evaluate epidemiologic studies, which were categorized based on study design (case-control, cohort, cross-sectional), various study quality criteria specific to dose-response analysis (number of dose groups, exposure ascertainment, exposure uncertainty), and availability of necessary dose-response data. Both case-control and cohort studies were included in the RRB analysis. The RRE(20) estimates were derived by modeling effective counts of cases and controls estimated from study-reported adjusted odds ratios and relative risks. Using a broad (but not necessarily comprehensive) set of epidemiologic studies of multiple health outcomes selected for the purposes of illustrating the RRB approach, this test case analysis would suggest that diseases of the circulatory system, bladder cancer, and lung cancer may be arsenic health outcomes that warrant further analysis. This is suggested by the number of datasets from adequate dose-response studies demonstrating an effect with RRBs close to 1 (i.e., RRE(20) values close to estimated background arsenic exposure levels).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7572727
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75727272021-11-01 Use of study-specific MOE-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments Hobbie, Kevin Shao, Kan Henning, Cara Mendez, William Lee, Janice S. Cote, Ila Druwe, Ingrid L. Davis, J. Allen Gift, Jeffrey S. Environ Int Article There are unique challenges in estimating dose-response with chemicals that are associated with multiple health outcomes and numerous studies. Some studies are more suitable than others for quantitative dose-response analyses. For such chemicals, an efficient method of screening studies and endpoints to identify suitable studies and potentially important health effects for dose-response modeling is valuable. Using inorganic arsenic as a test case, we developed a tiered approach that involves estimating study-specific margin of exposure (MOE)-like unitless ratios for two hypothetical scenarios. These study-specific unitless ratios are derived by dividing the exposure estimated to result in a 20% increase in relative risk over the background exposure (RRE(20)) by the background exposure, as estimated in two different ways. In our case study illustration, separate study-specific ratios are derived using estimates of United States population background exposure (RRB-US) and the mean study population reference group background exposure (RRB-SP). Systematic review methods were used to identify and evaluate epidemiologic studies, which were categorized based on study design (case-control, cohort, cross-sectional), various study quality criteria specific to dose-response analysis (number of dose groups, exposure ascertainment, exposure uncertainty), and availability of necessary dose-response data. Both case-control and cohort studies were included in the RRB analysis. The RRE(20) estimates were derived by modeling effective counts of cases and controls estimated from study-reported adjusted odds ratios and relative risks. Using a broad (but not necessarily comprehensive) set of epidemiologic studies of multiple health outcomes selected for the purposes of illustrating the RRB approach, this test case analysis would suggest that diseases of the circulatory system, bladder cancer, and lung cancer may be arsenic health outcomes that warrant further analysis. This is suggested by the number of datasets from adequate dose-response studies demonstrating an effect with RRBs close to 1 (i.e., RRE(20) values close to estimated background arsenic exposure levels). 2020-08-30 2020-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7572727/ /pubmed/32871380 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105986 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ).
spellingShingle Article
Hobbie, Kevin
Shao, Kan
Henning, Cara
Mendez, William
Lee, Janice S.
Cote, Ila
Druwe, Ingrid L.
Davis, J. Allen
Gift, Jeffrey S.
Use of study-specific MOE-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments
title Use of study-specific MOE-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments
title_full Use of study-specific MOE-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments
title_fullStr Use of study-specific MOE-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments
title_full_unstemmed Use of study-specific MOE-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments
title_short Use of study-specific MOE-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments
title_sort use of study-specific moe-like estimates to prioritize health effects from chemical exposure for analysis in human health assessments
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7572727/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32871380
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105986
work_keys_str_mv AT hobbiekevin useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments
AT shaokan useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments
AT henningcara useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments
AT mendezwilliam useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments
AT leejanices useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments
AT coteila useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments
AT druweingridl useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments
AT davisjallen useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments
AT giftjeffreys useofstudyspecificmoelikeestimatestoprioritizehealtheffectsfromchemicalexposureforanalysisinhumanhealthassessments