High throughput heuristics for prioritizing human exposure to environmental chemicals

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 48, Issue 21, 2014, Pages 12760-12767

  Wambaugh, John F ^a   Wang, Anran ^a,b,c   Dionisio, Kathie L ^a   Frame, Alicia ^a,c   Egeghy, Peter ^a   Judson, Richard ^a   Setzer, R Woodrow ^a  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c OAK RIDGE INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND EDUCATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HEALTH; HEALTH RISKS; HEURISTIC METHODS; INDICATORS (CHEMICAL); INFORMATION USE; POLLUTION CONTROL; POPULATION STATISTICS;

ANTHROPOGENIC CHEMICALS; BAYESIAN METHODOLOGY; CHEMICAL DESCRIPTORS; DEMOGRAPHIC GROUPS; ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICALS; EXPOSURE PREDICTION; HUMAN EXPOSURES; STRUCTURE-BASED;

CHEMICAL HAZARDS;

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL; POLLUTANT;

ANTHROPOGENIC EFFECT; DATA SET; DATABASE; GEOMETRY; HEALTH RISK; HEURISTICS; LINEARITY; POLLUTION EXPOSURE; PRIORITIZATION; RISK FACTOR;

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BODY MASS; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHILD; DEMOGRAPHY; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; FEMALE; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; MALE; POPULATION RESEARCH; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES; URINALYSIS; ANALYSIS; CHEMISTRY; FACTUAL DATABASE; HEURISTICS; NUTRITION; POLLUTANT; STATISTICAL MODEL; URINE;

UNITED STATES;

BAYES THEOREM; BIOMARKERS; CHILD; DATABASES, FACTUAL; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS; HEURISTICS; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; NUTRITION SURVEYS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84908577609     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es503583j     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Park, Y. H.; Lee, K.; Soltow, Q. A.; Strobel, F. H.; Brigham, K. L.; Parker, R. E.; Wilson, M. E.; Sutliff, R. L.; Mansfield, K. G.; Wachtman, L. M.; Ziegler, T. R.; Jones, D. P. High-performance metabolic profiling of plasma from seven mammalian species for simultaneous environmental chemical surveillance and bioeffect monitoring Toxicology 2012, 295 (1-3) 47-55
2. CDC. Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics: Atlanta, GA, February, 2011, 2011.
3. Crinnion, W. J. The CDC fourth national report on human exposure to environmental chemicals: What it tells us about our toxic burden and how it assist environmental medicine physicians Altern. Med. Rev. 2010, 15 (2) 101-9
4. Judson, R.; Richard, A.; Dix, D. J.; Houck, K.; Martin, M.; Kavlock, R.; Dellarco, V.; Henry, T.; Holderman, T.; Sayre, P.; Tan, S.; Carpenter, T.; Smith, E. The toxicity data landscape for environmental chemicals Environ. Health Perspect 2008, 117 (5) 685-695
5. USGAO. C hemical Regulation: Options for Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Toxic Substances Control Act; U.S. Governmental Accounting Office, 2009.
6. USGAO. Toxic Substances: EPA Has Increased Efforts to Assess and Control Chemicals but Could Strengthen Its Approach; U.S. Governmental Accounting Office, 2013.
7. Wilson, M. P.; Schwarzman, M. R. Toward a new U.S. chemicals policy: rebuilding the foundation to advance new science, green chemistry, and environmental health Environ. Health Perspect 2009, 117 (8) 1202-9
8. Tice, R. R.; Austin, C. P.; Kavlock, R. J.; Bucher, J. R. Improving the human hazard characterization of chemicals: A Tox21 update Environ. Health Perspect 2013, 121 (7) 756-765
9. National Research Council. Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment; The National Academies Press, 2009.
10. National Research Council. Exposure Science in the 21st Century: A Vision and a Strategy; The National Academies Press, 2012.
11. Cohen-Hubal, E. A.; Richard, A.; Aylward, L.; Edwards, S.; Gallagher, J.; Goldsmith, M.-R.; Isukapalli, S.; Tornero-Velez, R.; Weber, E.; Kavlock, R. Advancing exposure characterization for chemical evaluation and risk assessment J. Toxicol. Environ. Health, Part B 2010, 13 (2-4) 299-313
12. Egeghy, P. P.; Vallero, D. A.; Cohen Hubal, E. A. Exposure-based prioritization of chemicals for risk assessment Environ. Sci. Policy 2011, 14 (8) 950-964
13. Sheldon, L. S.; Cohen-Hubal, E. A. Exposure as part of a systems approach for assessing risk Environ. Health Perspect. 2009, 117 (8) 1181-1194
14. Thomas, R. S.; Philbert, M. A.; Auerbach, S. S.; Wetmore, B. A.; Devito, M. J.; Cote, I.; Rowlands, J. C.; Whelan, M. P.; Hays, S. M.; Andersen, M. E.; Meek, M. E.; Reiter, L. W.; Lambert, J. C.; Clewell, H. J.; Stephens, M. L.; Zhao, Q. J.; Wesselkamper, S. C.; Flowers, L.; Carney, E. W.; Pastoor, T. P.; Petersen, D. D.; Yauk, C. L.; Nong, A. Incorporating new technologies into toxicity testing and risk assessment: Moving from 21st century vision to a data-driven framework Toxicol. Sci. 2013, 136 (1) 4-18
15. Wambaugh, J. F.; Setzer, R. W.; Reif, D. M.; Gangwal, S.; Mitchell-Blackwood, J.; Arnot, J. A.; Jolliet, O.; Frame, A.; Rabinowitz, J.; Knudsen, T. B.; Judson, R. S.; Egeghy, P.; Vallero, D.; Hubal, E. A. C. High throughput models for exposure-based chemical prioritization in the expocast project Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47 (15) 8479-8488
16. Akaike, H. A new look at the statistical model identification Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on 1974, 19 (6) 716-723
17. Gelman, A.; Carlin, J.; Stern, H.; Rubin, D. Bayesian Data Analysis, 2 nd ed.; Chapman and Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL, 2004.
18. Mage, D. T.; Allen, R. H.; Gondy, G.; Smith, W.; Barr, D. B.; Needham, L. L. Estimating pesticide dose from urinary pesticide concentration data by creatinine correction in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES-III) J. Exposure Anal. Environ. Epidemiol. 2004, 14 (6) 457-465
19. Tan, Y.-M.; Liao, K. H.; Clewell, H. J., III Reverse dosimetry: Interpreting trihalomethanes biomonitoring data using physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling J. Exposure Anal. Environ. Epidemiol. 2006, 17 (7) 591-603
20. Lumley, T. Analysis of complex survey samples J. Statistical Software 2004, 9 (1) 1-19
21. Plummer, M. JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling, Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Distributed Statistical Computing (DSC 2003), March, 2003, 2003; pp 20-22.
22. Morgan, J. A.; Tatar, J. F. Calculation of the residual sum of squares for all possible regressions Technometrics 1972, 14 (2) 317-325
23. Stan Development Team Stan: A C++ Library for Probability and Sampling, 2.2.0; 2013; http://mc-stan.org/.
24. Carvalho, C. M.; Polson, N. G.; Scott, J. G. The horseshoe estimator for sparse signals Biometrika 2010, 97 (2) 465-480
25. Goldsmith, M. R.; Grulke, C. M.; Brooks, R. D.; Transue, T. R.; Tan, Y. M.; Frame, A.; Egeghy, P. P.; Edwards, R.; Chang, D. T.; Tornero-Velez, R.; Isaacs, K.; Wang, A.; Johnson, J.; Holm, K.; Reich, M.; Mitchell, J.; Vallero, D. A.; Phillips, L.; Phillips, M.; Wambaugh, J. F.; Judson, R. S.; Buckley, T. J.; Dary, C. C. Development of a consumer product ingredient database for chemical exposure screening and prioritization Food Chem. Toxicol. 2014, 65, 269-79
26. Oreskes, N. Evaluation (not validation) of quantitative models Environ. Health Perspect 1998, 106 (Suppl 6) 1453-60