Search

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) comprise a large class of chemicals with widespread use and persistence in the environment and in humans; however, most of the epidemiology research has focused on a small subset.The aim of this systematic evidence map (SEM) is to summarize the epidemiology evidence on approximately 150 lesser studied PFAS prioritized by the EPA for tiered toxicity testing, facilitating interpretation of those results as well as identification of priorities for risk assessment and data gaps for future research.The Populations, Exposure, Comparators, and Outcomes (PECO) criteria were intentionally broad to identify studies of any health effects in humans with information on associations with exposure to the identified PFAS. Systematic review methods were used to search for literature that was screened using machine-learning software and manual review. Studies meeting the PECO criteria underwent quantitative data extraction and evaluation for risk of bias and sensitivity using the Integrated Risk Information System approach.193 epidemiology studies were identified, which included information on 15 of the PFAS of interest. The most commonly studied health effect categories were metabolic (Most of the PFAS in this SEM have little to no epidemiology data available to inform evaluation of potential health effects. Although exposure to the 15 PFAS that had data was fairly low in most studies, these less-studied PFAS may be used as replacements for "legacy" PFAS, leading to potentially greater exposure. It is impractical to generate epidemiology evidence to fill the existing gaps for all potentially relevant PFAS. This SEM highlights some of the important research gaps that currently exist. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11185.

"Biological plausibility" is a concept frequently referred to in environmental and public health when researchers are evaluating how confident they are in the results and inferences of a study or evidence review. Biological plausibility is not, however, a domain of one of the most widely-used approaches for assessing the certainty of evidence (CoE) which underpins the findings of a systematic review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) CoE Framework. Whether the omission of biological plausibility is a potential limitation of the GRADE CoE Framework is a topic that is regularly discussed, especially in the context of environmental health systematic reviews. We analyse how the concept of "biological plausibility", as applied in the context of assessing certainty of the evidence that supports the findings of a systematic review, is accommodated under the processes of systematic review and the existing GRADE domains. We argue that "biological plausibility" is a concept which primarily comes into play when direct evidence about the effects of an exposure on a population of concern (usually humans) is absent, at high risk of bias, is inconsistent, or limited in other ways. In such circumstances, researchers look toward evidence from other study designs in order to draw conclusions. In this respect, we can consider experimental animal and in vitro evidence as "surrogates" for the target populations, exposures, comparators and outcomes of actual interest. Through discussion of 10 examples of experimental surrogates, we propose that the concept of biological plausibility consists of two principal aspects: a "generalisability aspect" and a "mechanistic aspect". The "generalisability aspect" concerns the validity of inferences from experimental models to human scenarios, and asks the same question as does the assessment of external validity or indirectness in systematic reviews. The "mechanistic aspect" concerns certainty in knowledge of biological mechanisms and would inform judgements of indirectness under GRADE, and thus the overall CoE. While both aspects are accommodated under the indirectness domain of the GRADE CoE Framework, further research is needed to determine how to use knowledge of biological mechanisms in the assessment of indirectness of the evidence in systematic reviews.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a large class of synthetic (man-made) chemicals widely used in consumer products and industrial processes. Thousands of distinct PFAS exist in commerce. The 2019 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Action Plan outlines a multiprogram national research plan to address the challenge of PFAS. One component of this strategy involves the use of systematic evidence map (SEM) approaches to characterize the evidence base for hundreds of PFAS.SEM methods were used to summarize available epidemiological and animal bioassay evidence for a set ofSystematic review methods were used to identify and screen literature using manual review and machine-learning software. The Populations, Exposures, Comparators, and Outcomes (PECO) criteria were kept broad to identify mammalian animal bioassay and epidemiological studies that could inform human hazard identification. A variety of supplemental content was also tracked, including information onMore than 40,000 studies were identified from scientific databases. Screening processes identified 44 animal and 148 epidemiology studies from the peer-reviewed literature and 95 animal and 50 epidemiology studies from gray literature that met PECO criteria. Epidemiological evidence (available for 15 PFAS) mostly assessed the reproductive, endocrine, developmental, metabolic, cardiovascular, and immune systems. Animal evidence (available for 40 PFAS) commonly assessed effects in the reproductive, developmental, urinary, immunological, and hepatic systems. Overall, 45 PFAS had evidence across animal and epidemiology data streams.Many of the

BACKGROUND AND AIM: US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments are an important source of toxicity information used by EPA, state and local hea...

Background: “Evidence Mapping” is an emerging tool that is increasingly being used to systematically identify, review, organize, quantify, and summarize the literature. It can be used as an effective method for identifying well-studied topic areas relevant to a broad research question along with any important literature gaps. However, because the procedure can be significantly resource-intensive, approaches that can increase the speed and reproducibility of evidence mapping are in great demand. Methods: We propose an alternative process called “rapid Evidence Mapping” (rEM) to map the scientific evidence in a time-efficient manner, while still utilizing rigorous, transparent and explicit methodological approaches. To illustrate its application, we have conducted a proof-of-concept case study on the topic of low-calorie sweeteners (LCS) with respect to human dietary exposures and health outcomes. During this process, we developed and made publicly available our study protocol, established a PECO (Participants, Exposure, Comparator, and Outcomes) statement, searched the literature, screened titles and abstracts to identify potentially relevant studies, and applied semi-automated machine learning approaches to tag and categorize the included articles. We created various visualizations including bubble plots and frequency tables to map the evidence and research gaps according to comparison type, population baseline health status, outcome group, and study sample size. We compared our results with a traditional evidence mapping of the same topic published in 2016 (Wang et al., 2016). Results: We conducted an rEM of LCS, for which we identified 8122 records from a PubMed search (January 1, 1946–May 1, 2014) and then utilized machine learning (SWIFT-Active Screener) to prioritize relevant records. After screening 2267 (28%) of the total set of titles and abstracts to achieve 95% estimated recall, we ultimately included 297 relevant studies. Overall, our findings corroborated those of Wang et al. (2016) and identified that most studies were acute or short-term in healthy individuals, and studied the outcomes of appetite, energy sensing and body weight. We also identified a lack of studies assessing appetite and dietary intake related outcomes in people with diabetes. The rEM approach required approximately 100 person-hours conducted over 7 calendar months. Conclusion: Rapid Evidence Mapping is an expeditious approach based on rigorous methodology that can be used to quickly summarize the available body of evidence relevant to a research question, identify gaps in the literature to inform future research, and contextualize the design of a systematic review within the broader scientific literature, significantly reducing human effort while yielding results comparable to those from traditional methods. The potential time savings of this approach in comparison to the traditional evidence mapping process make it a potentially powerful tool for rapidly translating knowledge to inform science-based decision-making. Keywords: Rapid evidence mapping, Evidence map, Systematic review, Evidence-based methodology, Low calorie sweeteners, Artificial sweeteners

The objective of this paper is to explain how to apply, interpret, and present the results of a new instrument to assess the risk of bias (RoB) in non-randomized studies (NRS) dealing with effects of environmental exposures on health outcomes. This instrument is modeled on the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) instrument. The RoB instrument for NRS of exposures assesses RoB along a standardized comparison to a randomized target experiment, instead of the study-design directed RoB approach. We provide specific guidance for the integral steps of developing a research question and target experiment, distinguishing issues of indirectness from RoB, making individual-study judgments, and performing and interpreting sensitivity analyses for RoB judgments across a body of evidence. Also, we present an approach for integrating the RoB assessments within the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework to assess the certainty of the evidence in the systematic review. Finally, we guide the reader through an overall assessment to support the rating of all domains that determine the certainty of a body of evidence using the GRADE approach. Keywords: Risk of bias, Environmental health, GRADE, Non-randomized studies, Study limitations, ROBINS

Contains fulltext : 235579.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) The workshop “Application of evidence-based methods to construct mechanistic frameworks for the development and use of non-animal toxicity tests” was organized by the Evidence-based Toxicology Collaboration and hosted by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group on June 12, 2019. The purpose of the workshop was to bring together international regulatory bodies, risk assessors, academic scientists, and industry to explore how systematic review methods and the adverse outcome pathway framework could be combined to develop and use mechanistic test methods for predicting the toxicity of chemical substances in an evidence-based manner. The meeting covered the history of biological frameworks, the way adverse outcome pathways are currently developed, the basic principles of systematic methodology, including systematic reviews and evidence maps, and assessment of cer­tainty in models, and adverse outcome pathways in particular. Specific topics were discussed via case studies in small break-out groups. The group concluded that adverse outcome pathways provide an important framework to support mechanism-based assessment in environmental health. The process of their development has a few challenges that could be addressed with systematic methods and automation tools. Addressing these challenges will increase the transparency of the evidence behind adverse outcome pathways and the consistency with which they are defined; this in turn will increase their value for supporting public health decisions. It was suggested to explore the details of applying systematic methods to adverse outcome pathway development in a series of case studies and workshops.

Background: Human exposures to bisphenol A (BPA) are widespread. The current study addresses uncertainties regarding human pharmacokinetics of BPA following dermal exposure. Objective: To examine the absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of BPA in humans following dermal administration. Methods: We dermally administered deuterated BPA (d6-BPA) to 10 subjects (6 men and 4 women) at a dose of 100 µg/kg over a 12-hour period and conducted blood and urine analysis from the beginning of dosing through a three- or six-day period. We present time-course serum and urine concentrations of total and unconjugated (“free”) d6-BPA and used this information to calculate terminal half-life and area under the curve. Results and Conclusions: Detectable serum levels of total d6-BPA were observed at 1.4 h after the start of dosing, and a maximum serum concentration (Cmax) of 3.26 nM was observed. Free d6-BPA was detectable in serum 2.8 h after start of dermal administration, with Cmax of 0.272 nM. Beginning at approximately seven hours and continuing to 12 h (which corresponds to cessation of exposure), the concentration of free and total serum d6-BPA plateaued. The terminal half-lives of total d6-BPA and free d6-BPA in the body were 21.4 ± 9.81 h and 17.6 ± 7.69 h, respectively. Elimination from the body was rate-limited by kinetics in the dermal compartment. Free d6-BPA was a greater percentage of the area under the curve of total serum BPA (8.81%) compared to the 0.56% observed in our previously published oral study. Recovery of total d6-BPA in urine was

Background In quantitative chemical risk assessment, a reference value is an estimate of an exposure to a chemical that is “likely to be without appreciable risk.” Because current “deterministic” approaches do not quantitatively characterize the likelihood or severity of harm, the National Academies has recommended using reference values derived from a risk-specific dose that are treated as random variables, with probability distributions characterizing uncertainty and variability. Objectives In order to build familiarity and address issues needed for routine and standardized derivation of probabilistic risk-specific dose distributions, a case example applying the unified probabilistic framework presented in Chiu and Slob (2015) is developed for acrolein. This case study is based on an updated systematic evidence map of literature (Keshava et al., 2020) identifying nasal lesions reported in Dorman et al. (2008) as the most appropriate endpoint and study for reference value derivation. Methods The probability distribution was calculated for the risk-specific dose, which in this implementation of the approach was calculated for the dose at which 1% of the human population is estimated to experience minimal lesions, and a probabilistic reference value was computed as the 5th percentile of this distribution. A deterministic reference value was also derived for comparison, and a sensitivity analysis of the probabilistic reference value was conducted investigating alternative assumptions for the point of departure type and exposure duration. Results The probabilistic reference value of 6 × 10−4 mg/m3 was slightly lower than the deterministic reference value of 8 × 10−4 mg/m3, and the risk-specific dose distribution had an uncertainty spanning a factor of 137 (95th-5th percentile ratio). Sensitivity analysis yielded slightly higher probabilistic reference values ranging between 9 × 10−4 mg/m3 and 2 × 10−3 mg/m3. Conclusions Using a probabilistic approach for deriving a reference value allows quantitative characterization of the severity, incidence, and uncertainty of effects at a given dose. The results can be used to inform risk management decisions and improve risk communication.

Assessing the risk of bias (RoB) of individual studies is a critical part in determining the certainty of a body of evidence from non-randomized studies (NRS) that evaluate potential health effects due to environmental exposures. The recently released RoB in NRS of Interventions (ROBINS-I) instrument has undergone careful development for health interventions. Using the fundamental design of ROBINS-I, which includes evaluating RoB against an ideal target trial, we explored developing a version of the instrument to evaluate RoB in exposure studies. During three sequential rounds of assessment, two or three raters (evaluators) independently applied ROBINS-I to studies from two systematic reviews and one case-study protocol that evaluated the relationship between environmental exposures and health outcomes. Feedback from raters, methodologists, and topic-specific experts informed important modifications to tailor the instrument to exposure studies. We identified the following areas of distinction for the modified instrument: terminology, formulation of the ideal target randomized experiment, guidance for cross-sectional studies and exposure assessment (both quality of measurement method and concern for potential exposure misclassification), and evaluation of issues related to study sensitivity. Using the target experiment approach significantly impacts the process for how environmental and occupational health studies are considered in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence-synthesis framework.

Background An increasing number of reports suggest early life exposures result in adverse effects in offspring who were never directly exposed; this phenomenon is termed “transgenerational inheritance.” Given concern for public health implications for potential effects of exposures transmitted to subsequent generations, it is critical to determine how widespread and robust this phenomenon is and to identify the range of exposures and possible outcomes. Objectives This scoping report examines the evidence for transgenerational inheritance associated with exposure to a wide range of stressors in humans and animals to identify areas of consistency, uncertainty, data gaps, and to evaluate general risk of bias issues for the transgenerational study design. Methods A protocol was developed to collect and categorize the literature into a systematic evidence map for transgenerational inheritance by health effects, exposures, and evidence streams following the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) approach for conducting literature-based health assessments. Results A PubMed search yielded 63,758 unique records from which 257 relevant studies were identified and categorized into a systematic evidence map by evidence streams (46 human and 211 animal), broad health effect categories, and exposures. Data extracted from the individual studies are available in the Health Assessment Workspace Collaborative (HAWC) program. There are relatively few bodies of evidence where multiple studies evaluated the same exposure and the same or similar outcomes. Studies evaluated for risk of bias generally had multiple issues in design or conduct. Conclusions The evidence mapping illustrated that risk of bias, few studies, and heterogeneity in exposures and endpoints examined present serious limitations to available bodies of evidence for assessing transgenerational effects. Targeted research is suggested to addressed inconsistencies and risk of bias issues identified, and thereby establish more robust bodies of evidence to critically assess transgenerational effects - particularly by adding data on exposure-outcome pairs where there is some evidence (i.e., reproductive, metabolic, and neurological effects).

Alternatives analysis (AA) is a method used in regulation and product design to identify, assess, and evaluate the safety and viability of potential substitutes for hazardous chemicals. It requires toxicological data for the existing chemical and potential alternatives. Predictive toxicology uses in silico and in vitro approaches, computational models, and other tools to expedite toxicological data generation in a more cost-effective manner than traditional approaches. The present article briefly reviews the challenges associated with using predictive toxicology in regulatory AA, then presents 4 recommendations for its advancement. It recommends using case studies to advance the integration of predictive toxicology into AA, adopting a stepwise process to employing predictive toxicology in AA beginning with prioritization of chemicals of concern, leveraging existing resources to advance the integration of predictive toxicology into the practice of AA, and supporting transdisciplinary efforts. The further incorporation of predictive toxicology into AA would advance the ability of companies and regulators to select alternatives to harmful ingredients, and potentially increase the use of predictive toxicology in regulation more broadly. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:915-925. © 2017 SETAC.

Background: Current exposure assessment research does not sufficiently address multi-pollutant exposure and their correlations in human media. Understanding the extent of chemical exposure in reproductive-aged women is of particular concern due to the potential for in utero exposure and fetal susceptibility.Objectives: The objectives of this study were to characterize concentrations of chemical biomarkers during preconception and examine correlations between and within chemical classes. Methods: We examined concentrations of 135 biomarkers from 16 chemical classes in blood and urine from 73 women aged 18-40 enrolled in Snart Foraeldre/Milieu, a prospective cohort study of pregnancy planners in Denmark (2011-2014). We compared biomarker concentrations with United States similarly-aged, nonpregnant women who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Environmental Survey (NHANES) and with other international biomonitoring studies. We performed principal component analysis to examine biomarker correlations.Results: The mean number of biomarkers detected in the population was 92 (range: 60-108). The most commonly detected chemical classes were phthalates, metals, phytoestrogens and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Except blood mercury, urinary barium and enterolactone, geometric means were higher in women from NHANES. Chemical classes measured in urine generally did not load on a single component, suggesting high between-class correlation among urinary biomarkers, while there is high within-class correlation for biomarkers measured in serum and blood.Conclusions: We identified ubiquitous exposure to multiple chemical classes in reproductive-aged Danish women, supporting the need for more research on chemical mixtures during preconception and early pregnancy. Inter- and intra-class correlation between measured biomarkers may reflect common exposure sources, specific lifestyle factors or shared metabolism pathways.

Background:Numerous studies have identified detectable levels of neonicotinoids (neonics) in the environment, adverse effects of neonics in many species, including mammals, and pathways through whi...

Background: In the screening phase of systematic review, researchers use detailed inclusion/exclusion criteria to decide whether each article in a set of candidate articles is relevant to the research question under consideration. A typical review may require screening thousands or tens of thousands of articles in and can utilize hundreds of person-hours of labor. Methods: Here we introduce SWIFT-Active Screener, a web-based, collaborative systematic review software application, designed to reduce the overall screening burden required during this resource-intensive phase of the review process. To prioritize articles for review, SWIFT-Active Screener uses active learning, a type of machine learning that incorporates user feedback during screening. Meanwhile, a negative binomial model is employed to estimate the number of relevant articles remaining in the unscreened document list. Using a simulation involving 26 diverse systematic review datasets that were previously screened by reviewers, we evaluated both the document prioritization and recall estimation methods. Results: On average, 95% of the relevant articles were identified after screening only 40% of the total reference list. In the 5 document sets with 5,000 or more references, 95% recall was achieved after screening only 34% of the available references, on average. Furthermore, the recall estimator we have proposed provides a useful, conservative estimate of the percentage of relevant documents identified during the screening process. Conclusion: SWIFT-Active Screener can result in significant time savings compared to traditional screening and the savings are increased for larger project sizes. Moreover, the integration of explicit recall estimation during screening solves an important challenge faced by all machine learning systems for document screening: when to stop screening a prioritized reference list. The software is currently available in the form of a multi-user, collaborative, online web application. Keywords: Systematic review, Evidence mapping, Active learning, Machine learning, Document screening, Recall estimation

In 2014, early in the GRADE Working Group's initiative of expanding evidence assessment and guideline develop to address specific topic areas, the working group created the Environmental and Occupational Health Project Group. The project group began by developing a research agenda to advance the rigor and transparency of systematic reviews and guideline development in this field by adapting GRADE to support decision-making in environmental health. In a commentary for Environment International, we first introduced GRADE, examined steps of the guideline development process currently used for decision-making, and outlined suggestions for a research agenda to address decision-making in the environmental and occupational health field (Morgan et al., 2016).

The third meeting of the International Collaboration for Automation of Systematic Reviews (ICASR) was held 17–18 October 2017 in London, England. ICASR is an interdisciplinary group whose goal is to maximize the use of technology for conducting rapid, accurate, and efficient systematic reviews of scientific evidence. The group seeks to facilitate the development and widespread acceptance of automated techniques for systematic reviews. The meeting’s conclusion was that the most pressing needs at present are to develop approaches for validating currently available tools and to provide increased access to curated corpora that can be used for validation. To that end, ICASR’s short-term goals in 2018–2019 are to propose and publish protocols for key tasks in systematic reviews and to develop an approach for sharing curated corpora for validating the automation of the key tasks.

OBJECTIVE Little is known about arsenic and diabetes in youth. We examined the association of arsenic with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Case-Control (SEARCH-CC) study. Because one-carbon metabolism can influence arsenic metabolism, we also evaluated the potential interaction of folate and vitamin B12 with arsenic metabolism on the odds of diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Six hundred eighty-eight participants RESULTS Median ∑As, iAs%, MMA%, and DMA% were 83.1 ng/L, 63.4%, 10.3%, and 25.2%, respectively. ∑As was not associated with either type of diabetes. The fully adjusted odds ratios (95% CI), rescaled to compare a difference in levels corresponding to the interquartile range of iAs%, MMA%, and DMA%, were 0.68 (0.50–0.91), 1.33 (1.02–1.74), and 1.28 (1.01–1.63), respectively, for type 1 diabetes and 0.82 (0.48–1.39), 1.09 (0.65–1.82), and 1.17 (0.77–1.77), respectively, for type 2 diabetes. In interaction analysis, the odds ratio of type 1 diabetes by MMA% was 1.80 (1.25–2.58) and 0.98 (0.70–1.38) for participants with plasma folate levels above and below the median (P for interaction = 0.02), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Low iAs% versus high MMA% and DMA% was associated with a higher odds of type 1 diabetes, with a potential interaction by folate levels. These data support further research on the role of arsenic metabolism in type 1 diabetes, including the interplay with one-carbon metabolism biomarkers.

Background: Bisphenol A (BPA) is a high-production-volume chemical associated with a wide range of health outcomes in animal and human studies. BPA is used as a developer in thermal paper products, including cash register receipt paper; however, little is known about exposure of cashiers to BPA and alternative compounds in receipt paper. Objective: We determined whether handling receipt paper results in measurable absorption of BPA or the BPA alternatives bisphenol S (BPS) and 4-hydroxyphenyl 4-isoprooxyphenylsulfone (BPSIP). Methods: Cashiers (n = 77) and non-cashiers (n = 25) were recruited from the Raleigh–Durham–Chapel Hill region of North Carolina during 2011–2013. Receipts were analyzed for the presence of BPA or alternatives considered for use in thermal paper. In cashiers, total urine and serum BPA, BPS, and BPSIP levels in post-shift samples (collected ≤ 2 hr after completing a shift) were compared with pre-shift samples. Levels of these compounds in urine from cashiers were compared to levels in urine from non-cashiers. Results: Each receipt contained 1–2% by weight of the paper of BPA, BPS, or BPSIP. The post-shift geometric mean total urinary BPS concentration was significantly higher than the pre-shift mean in 33 cashiers who handled receipts containing BPS. The mean urine BPA concentrations in 31 cashiers who handled BPA receipts were as likely to decrease as to increase after a shift, but the mean post-shift concentrations were significantly higher than those in non-cashiers. BPSIP was detected more frequently in the urine of cashiers handling BPSIP receipts than in the urine of non-cashiers. Only a few cashiers had detectable levels of total BPA or BPS in serum, whereas BPSIP tended to be detected more frequently. Conclusions: Thermal receipt paper is a potential source of occupational exposure to BPA, BPS, and BPSIP. Citation: Thayer KA, Taylor KW, Garantziotis S, Schurman SH, Kissling GE, Hunt D, Herbert B, Church R, Jankowich R, Churchwell MI, Scheri RC, Birnbaum LS, Bucher JR. 2016. Bisphenol A, bisphenol S, and 4-hydro​xyphenyl 4-isopro​oxyphenyl​sulfone (BPSIP) in urine and blood of cashiers. Environ Health Perspect 124:437–444; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409427

Background The environmental health community needs transparent, methodologically rigorous, and rapid approaches for updating human health risk assessments. These assessments often contain reference values for cancer and/or noncancer effects. Increasingly, the use of systematic review methods are preferred when developing these assessments. Systematic evidence maps are a type of analysis that has the potential to be very helpful in the update process, especially when combined with machine-learning software advances designed to expedite the process of conducting a review. Objectives To evaluate the applicability of evidence mapping to determine whether new evidence is likely to result in a change to an existing health reference value, using inhalation exposure to the air pollutant acrolein as a case example. Methods New literature published since the 2008 California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Reference Exposure Level (REL) for acrolein was assessed. Systematic review methods were used to search the literature and screening included the use of machine-learning software. The Populations, Exposures, Comparators and Outcomes (PECO) criteria were kept broad to identify studies that characterized acute and chronic exposure and could be informative for hazard characterization. Studies that met the PECO criteria after full-text review were briefly summarized before their suitability for chronic point of departure (POD) derivation and calculation of a reference value was considered. Studies considered potentially suitable underwent a targeted evaluation to determine their suitability for use in dose–response analysis. Results Over 15,000 studies were identified from scientific databases. Both machine-learning and manual screening processes were used to identify 60 studies considered PECO-relevant after full-text review. Most of these PECO-relevant studies were short-term exposure animal studies (acute or less than 1 month of exposure) and considered less suitable for deriving a chronic reference value when compared to the subchronic study in rats used in the 2008 OEHHA assessment. Thirteen epidemiological studies were identified but had limitations in the exposure assessment that made them less suitable for dose–response compared to the subchronic rat study. Among the 13 studies, there were four controlled trial studies that have the potential to be informative for future acute reference value derivation. Thus, the 2008 subchronic rat study used by OEHHA appears to still be the most appropriate study for chronic reference value derivation. In addition, advances in dosimetric modeling for gases, including new evidence pertinent to acrolein, could be considered when updating existing acrolein toxicity values. Conclusions Evidence mapping is a very useful tool to assess the need for updating an assessment based on understanding the potential impact of new studies on revising an existing health reference value. In this case example, the focus was to identify studies suitable for chronic exposure dose–response analysis, while also identifying studies that may be important to consider for acute exposure scenarios, hazard identification, or for future research. This allows the evidence map to be a useful resource for a range of decision-making contexts. Specialized systematic review software increased the efficiency of the process in terms of human resources and time to conduct the analysis.

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a high production volume chemical widely used in plastics, food packaging, and many other products. It is well known that endocrine-disrupting chemicals might be harmful to human health due to interference with normal hormone actions. Recent studies report widespread usage and exposure to many BPA-like chemicals (BPs) that are structurally or functionally similar to BPA. However, the biological actions and toxicity of those BPs are still relatively unknown. To address this data gap, we used in vitro cell models to evaluate the ability of 22 BPs to induce or inhibit estrogenic and androgenic activity. BPA, Bisphenol AF (BPAF), bisphenol Z (BPZ), bisphenol C (BPC), tetramethyl bisphenol A (TMBPA), bisphenol S (BPS), bisphenol E (BPE), 4,4-bisphenol F (4,4-BPF), bisphenol AP (BPAP), bisphenol B (BPB), tetrachlorobisphenol A (TCBPA), and benzylparaben (PHBB) induced estrogen receptor (ER)α and/or ERβ-mediated activity. With the exception of BPS, TCBPA, and PHBB, these same BPs were also androgen receptor (AR) antagonists. Only 3 BPs were found to be ER antagonists. Bisphenol P (BPP) selectively inhibited ERβ-mediated activity and 4-(4-phenylmethoxyphenyl)sulfonylphenol (BPS-MPE) and 2,4-bisphenol S (2,4-BPS) selectively inhibited ERα-mediated activity. None of the BPs induced AR-mediated activity. In addition, we identify that the BPs can bind to ER or AR with varying degrees by a molecular modeling analysis. Taken together, these findings help us to understand the molecular mechanism of BPs and further consideration of their usage in consumer products.

[First paragraph] A clearly-framed question creates the structure and delineates the approach to defining research objectives, conducting systematic reviews and developing health guidance (Guyatt et al., 2011; Armstrong et al., 2007). To assess the association between exposures and outcomes, including in the field of nutrition, environmental and occupational health, the concept of defining the Population (including animal species), Exposure, Comparator, and Outcomes (PECO) as pillars of the question is increasingly accepted (Morgan et al., 2016; Morgan et al., n.d.). Thus, the PECO defines the objectives of the review or guideline. Furthermore, the PECO informs the study design or inclusion and exclusion criteria for a review, as well as facilitating the interpretation of the directness of the findings based on how well the actual research findings represent the original question.

The second meeting of the International Collaboration for Automation of Systematic Reviews (ICASR) was held 3–4 October 2016 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. ICASR is an interdisciplinary group whose aim is to maximize the use of technology for conducting rapid, accurate, and efficient systematic reviews of scientific evidence. Having automated tools for systematic review should enable more transparent and timely review, maximizing the potential for identifying and translating research findings to practical application. The meeting brought together multiple stakeholder groups including users of summarized research, methodologists who explore production processes and systematic review quality, and technologists such as software developers, statisticians, and vendors. This diversity of participants was intended to ensure effective communication with numerous stakeholders about progress toward automation of systematic reviews and stimulate discussion about potential solutions to identified challenges. The meeting highlighted challenges, both simple and complex, and raised awareness among participants about ongoing efforts by various stakeholders. An outcome of this forum was to identify several short-term projects that participants felt would advance the automation of tasks in the systematic review workflow including (1) fostering better understanding about available tools, (2) developing validated datasets for testing new tools, (3) determining a standard method to facilitate interoperability of tools such as through an application programming interface or API, and (4) establishing criteria to evaluate the quality of tools’ output. ICASR 2016 provided a beneficial forum to foster focused discussion about tool development and resources and reconfirm ICASR members’ commitment toward systematic reviews’ automation.

Laboratory animal studies are used in a wide range of human health related research areas, such as basic biomedical research, drug research, experimental surgery and environmental health. The results of these studies can be used to inform decisions regarding clinical research in humans, for example the decision to proceed to clinical trials. If the research question relates to potential harms with no expectation of benefit (e.g., toxicology), studies in experimental animals may provide the only relevant or controlled data and directly inform clinical management decisions. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are important tools to provide robust and informative evidence summaries of these animal studies. Rating how certain we are about the evidence could provide important information about the translational probability of findings in experimental animal studies to clinical practice and probably improve it. Evidence summaries and certainty in the evidence ratings could also be used (1) to support selection of interventions with best therapeutic potential to be tested in clinical trials, (2) to justify a regulatory decision limiting human exposure (to drug or toxin), or to (3) support decisions on the utility of further animal experiments. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach is the most widely used framework to rate the certainty in the evidence and strength of health care recommendations. Here we present how the GRADE approach could be used to rate the certainty in the evidence of preclinical animal studies in the context of therapeutic interventions. We also discuss the methodological challenges that we identified, and for which further work is needed. Examples are defining the importance of consistency within and across animal species and using GRADE's indirectness domain as a tool to predict translation from animal models to humans.

Background Practice guidelines require a substantial investment of resources and time, often taking between 1 and 3 years from conceptualisation to publication. However, urgent situations require the development of recommendations in a shorter timeframe. In this third and final article in the series exploring challenges and solutions in developing rapid guidelines (RGs), we propose guiding principles for the development of RGs. Methods We utilised the Guideline International Network-McMaster Guideline Development Checklist (GDC) as a starting point for elements to consider during RG development. We built on those elements using the findings from a systematic review of guideline manuals, a survey of international organisations conducting RGs, and interviews of guideline developers within WHO. We reviewed initial findings and developed an intermediate list of elements, as well as narrative guidance. We then invited experts to validate the intermediate list, reviewing for placement, brevity and redundancy. We used this iterative process and group consensus to determine the final elements for RG development guidance. Results Our work identified 21 principles within the topics of the Guideline International Network-McMaster GDC to guide the planning and development of RGs. Principles fell within 15 of the 18 checklist topics, highlighting strategies to streamline and expedite the guideline development process. Conclusions We defined principles to guide the development of RGs, while maintaining a standardised, rigorous and transparent process. These principles will serve as guidance for guideline developers responding to urgent situations such as public health urgencies. Integration of these principles within currently disseminated guideline development standards will facilitate the use of those tools in situations necessitating RG recommendations.

Background: The objective of this evaluation is to understand the human health impacts of mountaintop removal (MTR) mining, the major method of coal mining in and around Central Appalachia. MTR mining impacts the air, water, and soil and raises concerns about potential adverse health effects in neighboring communities; exposures associated with MTR mining include particulate matter (PM), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), metals, hydrogen sulfide, and other recognized harmful substances. Methods: A systematic review was conducted of published studies of MTR mining and community health, occupational studies of MTR mining, and any available animal and in vitro experimental studies investigating the effects of exposures to MTR-mining-related chemical mixtures. Six databases (Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Toxline, and Web of Science) were searched with customized terms, and no restrictions on publication year or language, through October 27, 2016. The eligibility criteria included all human population studies and animal models of human health, direct and indirect measures of MTR-mining exposure, any health-related effect or change in physiological response, and any study design type. Risk of bias was assessed for observational and experimental studies using an approach developed by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT). To provide context for these health effects, a summary of the exposure literature is included that focuses on describing findings for outdoor air, indoor air, and drinking water. Results: From a literature search capturing 3088 studies, 33 human studies (29 community, four occupational), four experimental studies (two in rat, one in vitro and in mice, one in C. elegans), and 58 MTR mining exposure studies were identified. A number of health findings were reported in observational human studies, including cardiopulmonary effects, mortality, and birth defects. However, concerns for risk of bias were identified, especially with respect to exposure characterization, accounting for confounding variables (such as socioeconomic status), and methods used to assess health outcomes. Typically, exposure was assessed by proximity of residence or hospital to coal mining or production level at the county level. In addition, assessing the consistency of findings was challenging because separate publications likely included overlapping case and comparison groups. For example, 11 studies of mortality were conducted with most reporting higher rates associated with coal mining, but many of these relied on the same national datasets and were unable to consider individual-level contributors to mortality such as poor socioeconomic status or smoking. Two studies of adult rats reported impaired microvascular and cardiac mitochondrial function after intratracheal exposure to PM from MTR-mining sites. Exposures associated with MTR mining included reports of PM levels that sometimes exceeded Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards; higher levels of dust, trace metals, hydrogen sulfide gas; and a report of increased public drinking water violations. Discussion: This systematic review could not reach conclusions on community health effects of MTR mining because of the strong potential for bias in the current body of human literature. Improved characterization of exposures by future community health studies and further study of the effects of MTR mining chemical mixtures in experimental models will be critical to determining health risks of MTR mining to communities. Without such work, uncertainty will remain regarding the impact of these practices on the health of the people who breathe the air and drink the water affected by MTR mining. Keywords: Mountaintop removal mining, Coal mining, Appalachia, Surface mining, Community health, Systematic review, Exposure, Risk of bias, Risk

Contains fulltext : 177212.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Systematic reviews, pioneered in the clinical field, provide a transparent, methodologically rigorous and reproducible means of summarizing the available evidence on a precisely framed research question. Having matured to a well-established approach in many research fields, systematic reviews are receiving increasing attention as a potential tool for answering toxicological questions. In the larger framework of evidence-based toxicology, the advantages and obstacles of, as well as the approaches for, adapting and adopting systematic reviews to toxicology are still being explored. To provide the toxicology community with a starting point for conducting or understanding systematic reviews, we herein summarized available guidance documents from various fields of application. We have elaborated on the systematic review process by breaking it down into ten steps, starting with planning the project, framing the question, and writing and publishing the protocol, and concluding with interpretation and reporting. In addition, we have identified the specific methodological challenges of toxicological questions and have summarized how these can be addressed. Ultimately, this primer is intended to stimulate scientific discussions of the identified issues to fuel the development of toxicology-specific methodology and to encourage the application of systematic review methodology to toxicological issues.

Background: Systematic-review methodologies provide objectivity and transparency to the process of collecting and synthesizing scientific evidence in reaching conclusions on specific research questions. There is increasing interest in applying these procedures to address environmental health questions. Objectives: The goal was to develop a systematic-review framework to address environmental health questions by extending approaches developed for clinical medicine to handle the breadth of data relevant to environmental health sciences (e.g., human, animal, and mechanistic studies). Methods: The Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) adapted guidance from authorities on systematic-review and sought advice during development of the OHAT Approach through consultation with technical experts in systematic review and human health assessments, as well as scientific advisory groups and the public. The method was refined by considering expert and public comments and through application to case studies. Results and Discussion: Here we present a seven-step framework for systematic review and evidence integration for reaching hazard identification conclusions: 1) problem formulation and protocol development, 2) search for and select studies for inclusion, 3) extract data from studies, 4) assess the quality or risk of bias of individual studies, 5) rate the confidence in the body of evidence, 6) translate the confidence ratings into levels of evidence, and 7) integrate the information from different evidence streams (human, animal, and “other relevant data” including mechanistic or in vitro studies) to develop hazard identification conclusions. Conclusion: The principles of systematic review can be successfully applied to environmental health questions to provide greater objectivity and transparency to the process of developing conclusions. Citation: Rooney AA, Boyles AL, Wolfe MS, Bucher JR, Thayer KA. 2014. Systematic review and evidence integration for literature-based environmental health science assessments. Environ Health Perspect 122:711–718; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307972

Objective We performed a systematic review of the epidemiology literature to identify the metabolic effects associated with phthalate exposure. Data sources and study eligibility criteria Six phthalates were included in the review: di(2‑ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), diisononyl phthalate (DINP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP), butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), and diethyl phthalate (DEP). The initial literature search (of PubMed, Web of Science, and Toxline) included all studies of metabolic effects in humans, and outcomes were selected for full systematic review based on data availability. Study evaluation and synthesis methods Studies of diabetes and insulin resistance were evaluated using criteria defined a priori for risk of bias and sensitivity by two reviewers using a domain-based approach; studies identified with a pre-defined critical deficiency were excluded. Evidence was synthesized by outcome and phthalate and strength of evidence was summarized using a structured framework. Studies of obesity and renal effects received “screening level” reviews to determine whether full systematic review was warranted. Results The primary outcomes reviewed here are (number of included/excluded studies in parentheses): type 2 diabetes (1/3), insulin resistance (13/3), and impaired glucose tolerance and blood glucose in pregnancy (4/2). For DEHP exposure, there was consistency among studies of insulin resistance and coherence with the single included study of diabetes, as well as an observed exposure-response gradient observed in a study of insulin resistance. This evidence is considered moderate. Similarly, for DBP and DIBP exposure, the evidence is considered moderate due to strong positive associations in the diabetes study and coherent results for insulin resistance. For DINP, BBP, and DEP, the evidence is considered slight. No association was reported in the single study of diabetes with BBP and DEP exposure (DINP was not investigated). The available evidence does indicate an association between exposure to these phthalates and insulin resistance, but the small number of studies and the lack of coherence with diabetes decreases confidence. The screening level reviews for obesity and renal effects determined that the currently available evidence is inadequate to assess the associations between these outcomes and phthalate exposure. Conclusions and implications of key findings Overall, these results support that phthalate exposure at levels seen in human populations may have metabolic effects. Given the mechanistic support, the large effect sizes for incident diabetes in the single available study, and the coherence with insulin resistance, the association between phthalate exposure and diabetes risk should be considered when assessing the risks and costs of exposure to specific phthalates in humans. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the U.S. EPA.

Recent studies report widespread usage or exposure to a variety of chemicals with structural or functional similarity to bisphenol A (BPA), referred to as BPA analogues or derivatives. These have been detected in foodstuffs, house dust, environmental samples, human urine or blood, and consumer products. Compared to BPA, relatively little is known about potential toxicity of these compounds. This scoping review aimed to summarize the human, animal, and mechanistic toxicity data for 24 BPA analogues of emerging interest to research and regulatory communities. PubMed was searched from March 1, 2015 to January 5, 2019 and combined with the results obtained from literature searches conducted through March 23, 2015, in The National Toxicology Program's Research Report 4 (NTP RR-04), "Biological Activity of Bisphenol A (BPA) Structural Analogues and Functional Alternatives". Study details are presented in interactive displays using Tableau Public. In total, 5748 records were screened for inclusion. One hundred sixty seven studies were included from NTP RR-04 and 175 studies were included from the updated literature search through January 2019. In total, there are 22, 117, and 221 human epidemiological, experimental animal, or in vitro studies included. The most frequently studied BPA analogues are bisphenol S (BPS), bisphenol F (4,4-BPF), and bisphenol AF (BPAF). Notable changes in the literature since 2015 include the growing body of human epidemiological studies and in vivo studies conducted in zebrafish. Numerous new endpoints were also evaluated across all three evidence streams including diabetes, obesity, and oxidative stress. However, few studies have addressed endpoints such as neurodevelopmental outcomes or impacts on the developing mammary or prostate glands, which are known to be susceptible to disruption by BPA. Further, there remains a critical need for better exposure information in order to prioritize experimental studies. Moving forward, researchers should also ensure that full dose responses are performed for all main effects in order to support hazard and risk characterization efforts. The evidence gathered here suggests that hazard and risk characterizations should expand beyond BPA in order to consider BPA structural and functional analogues.

The burden of diabetes is increasing globally. Identifying novel preventable risk factors is an urgent need. In 2011, the U.S. National Toxicological Program (NTP) conducted a workshop to evaluate the epidemiologic and experimental evidence on the relationship of environmental chemicals with obesity, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome. Although the evidence was insufficient to establish causality, the NTP workshop review identified an overall positive association between some environmental chemicals and diabetes. In the present systematic review, our objective was to summarize the epidemiological research published since the NTP workshop. We identified a total of 29 articles (7 on arsenic, 3 on cadmium, 2 on mercury, 11 on persistent organic pollutants, 3 on phthalates, and 4 on bisphenol A), including 7 prospective studies. Considering consistency, temporality, strength, dose-response relationship, and biological plausibility (confounding), we concluded that the evidence is suggestive but not sufficient for a relationship between arsenic and persistent organic pollutants and is insufficient for mercury, phthalates, and bisphenol A. For cadmium, the epidemiologic evidence does not seem to suggest an association with diabetes. Important research questions include the need for additional prospective studies and the evaluation of the dose-response relationship, the role of joint exposures, and effect modification with other comorbidities and genetic variants.

Display Omitted Implemented a generic rule-based method to extract epidemiological characteristics.Created environmental health exposure specific dictionaries.Precision ranging from 81% to 100% across six characteristics.Automated extraction is a feasible approach towards automation of systematic reviews. IntroductionMost data extraction efforts in epidemiology are focused on obtaining targeted information from clinical trials. In contrast, limited research has been conducted on the identification of information from observational studies, a major source for human evidence in many fields, including environmental health. The recognition of key epidemiological information (e.g., exposures) through text mining techniques can assist in the automation of systematic reviews and other evidence summaries. MethodWe designed and applied a knowledge-driven, rule-based approach to identify targeted information (study design, participant population, exposure, outcome, confounding factors, and the country where the study was conducted) from abstracts of epidemiological studies included in several systematic reviews of environmental health exposures. The rules were based on common syntactical patterns observed in text and are thus not specific to any systematic review. To validate the general applicability of our approach, we compared the data extracted using our approach versus hand curation for 35 epidemiological study abstracts manually selected for inclusion in two systematic reviews. ResultsThe returned F-score, precision, and recall ranged from 70% to 98%, 81% to 100%, and 54% to 97%, respectively. The highest precision was observed for exposure, outcome and population (100%) while recall was best for exposure and study design with 97% and 89%, respectively. The lowest recall was observed for the population (54%), which also had the lowest F-score (70%). ConclusionThe generated performance of our text-mining approach demonstrated encouraging results for the identification of targeted information from observational epidemiological study abstracts related to environmental exposures. We have demonstrated that rules based on generic syntactic patterns in one corpus can be applied to other observational study design by simple interchanging the dictionaries aiming to identify certain characteristics (i.e., outcomes, exposures). At the document level, the recognised information can assist in the selection and categorization of studies included in a systematic review.