Search

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small RNAs that regulate mRNA expression and have been targeted as biomarkers of organ damage and disease. To explore the utility of miRNAs to assess injury to specific tissues, a tissue atlas of miRNA abundance was constructed. The Rat Atlas of Tissue-specific and Enriched miRNAs (RATEmiRs) catalogues miRNA sequencing data from 21 and 23 tissues in male and female Sprague-Dawley rats, respectively. RATEmiRs identifies tissue-enriched (TE), tissue-specific (TS), or organ-specific (OS) miRNAs via comparisons of one or more tissue or organ vs others. We provide a brief overview of RATEmiRs and present how to use it to detect miRNA expression abundance of candidate biomarkers as well as to compare the expression of miRNAs between rat and human. The database is available at [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A framework of 'Common Criteria' (i.e. a series of questions) has been developed to inform the use and evaluation of biomonitoring data in the context of human exposure and risk assessment. The data-rich chemical benzene was selected for use in a case study to assess whether refinement of the Common Criteria framework was necessary, and to gain additional perspective on approaches for integrating biomonitoring data into a risk-based context. The available data for benzene satisfied most of the Common Criteria and allowed for a risk-based evaluation of the benzene biomonitoring data. In general, biomarker (blood benzene, urinary benzene and urinary S-phenylmercapturic acid) central tendency (i.e. mean, median and geometric mean) concentrations for non-smokers are at or below the predicted blood or urine concentrations that would correspond to exposure at the US Environmental Protection Agency reference concentration (30 µg/m3), but greater than blood or urine concentrations relating to the air concentration at the 1 × 10−5 excess cancer risk (2.9 µg/m3). Smokers clearly have higher levels of benzene exposure, and biomarker levels of benzene for non-smokers are generally consistent with ambient air monitoring results. While some biomarkers of benzene are specific indicators of exposure, the interpretation of benzene biomonitoring levels in a health-risk context are complicated by issues associated with short half-lives and gaps in knowledge regarding the relationship between the biomarkers and subsequent toxic effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While immunotoxicology evaluations are often conducted in either rodents or non-human primates, findings in standard toxicology studies may trigger additional investigations in dogs. A survey sponsored by the HESI Immunotoxicology Technical Committee, and described herein, was conducted to gather information regarding the extent and nature of immunology and immunotoxicity assessments available in the dog, and the need thereof. The survey was issued via e-mail to scientists affiliated with 39 organizations in industry and academia, including contract research organizations, academic research organizations, pharmaceutical companies, and veterinary practices. Fifteen institutions responded, including 10 biotechnology or pharmaceutical industry organizations, 4 contract research organizations, and 1 academic institution. Responses indicated that indeed, immunological assessments in dogs are necessary for research and/or toxicology purposes. The survey demonstrated that multiple types of assays are used in the dog model, including assessment of T-cell-dependent antibody responses, immunoglobulins, complement CH50, cytokines and cytokine mRNAs, lymphocyte proliferation in response to T-cell mitogens, neutrophil activation, phagocytosis, and immunophenotyping of several cell types. The survey also revealed that certain assays/endpoints are not available in the dog (complement components, NK immunophenotyping, T-cell activation and memory immunophenotyping) or require further optimization ( ex vivo cytolysis assays such as CTL and NK function, B-cell proliferation in response to LPS). In addition, the survey indicated that a greater understanding of the specificity of the available immunophenotyping reagents is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: It is known that there are usually several biomarkers and/or medium combinations that can be applied to answer a specific exposure question. To help determine an appropriate combination for the specific question, we have developed a weight-of-evidence Framework that provides a relative appropriateness score for competing combinations. Methods: The Framework is based on an expert assessor''s evaluation of the relevance and suitability of the biomarker and medium for the question based on a set of criteria. We provide a computer based modeling tool to guide the researcher through the process. Results: We present an example with six biomarkers of benzene exposure in one matrix; the six are either the most commonly used biomarkers and/or have recent widespread usage. The example clearly demonstrates the usefulness of the Framework for scoring the choices, as well as the transparency of the method that provides the basis for discussion. Conclusions: The Framework provides for the first time a method to transparently document the rationale behind selecting, from among a set of alternatives, the most scientifically supportable exposure biomarker to address a specific biomonitoring question, thus providing a reproducible account of expert opinions on the suitability of a biomarker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The public health and environmental communities will face many challenges during the next decade. To identify significant issues that might be addressed as part of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) scientific portfolio, an expert group of key government, academic, and industry scientists from around the world were assembled in 2009 to map the current and future landscape of scientific and regulatory challenges. The value of the scientific mapping exercise was the development of a tool which HESI, individual companies, research institutions, government agencies, and regulatory authorities can use to anticipate key challenges, place them into context, and thus strategically refine and expand scientific project portfolios into the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]