Jon R Sobus1, Yu-Mei Tan, Joachim D Pleil, Linda S Sheldon. 1. National Exposure Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA. sobus.jon@epa.gov
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biomonitoring is used in exposure and risk assessments to reduce uncertainties along the source-to-outcome continuum. Specifically, biomarkers can help identify exposure sources, routes, and distributions, and reflect kinetic and dynamic processes following exposure events. A variety of computational models now utilize biomarkers to better understand exposures at the population, individual, and sub-individual (target) levels. However, guidance is needed to clarify biomonitoring use given available measurements and models. OBJECTIVE: This article presents a biomonitoring research framework designed to improve biomarker use and interpretation in support of exposure and risk assessments. DISCUSSION: The biomonitoring research framework is based on a modified source-to-outcome continuum. Five tiers of biomonitoring analyses are included in the framework, beginning with simple cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, and ending with complex analyses using various empirical and mechanistic models. Measurements and model requirements of each tier are given, as well as considerations to enhance analyses. Simple theoretical examples are also given to demonstrate applications of the framework for observational exposure studies. CONCLUSION: This biomonitoring framework can be used as a guide for interpreting existing biomarker data, designing new studies to answer specific exposure- and risk-based questions, and integrating knowledge across scientific disciplines to better address human health risks. Published by Elsevier B.V.
BACKGROUND: Biomonitoring is used in exposure and risk assessments to reduce uncertainties along the source-to-outcome continuum. Specifically, biomarkers can help identify exposure sources, routes, and distributions, and reflect kinetic and dynamic processes following exposure events. A variety of computational models now utilize biomarkers to better understand exposures at the population, individual, and sub-individual (target) levels. However, guidance is needed to clarify biomonitoring use given available measurements and models. OBJECTIVE: This article presents a biomonitoring research framework designed to improve biomarker use and interpretation in support of exposure and risk assessments. DISCUSSION: The biomonitoring research framework is based on a modified source-to-outcome continuum. Five tiers of biomonitoring analyses are included in the framework, beginning with simple cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses, and ending with complex analyses using various empirical and mechanistic models. Measurements and model requirements of each tier are given, as well as considerations to enhance analyses. Simple theoretical examples are also given to demonstrate applications of the framework for observational exposure studies. CONCLUSION: This biomonitoring framework can be used as a guide for interpreting existing biomarker data, designing new studies to answer specific exposure- and risk-based questions, and integrating knowledge across scientific disciplines to better address human health risks. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Authors: Caroline L Ring; Jon A Arnot; Deborah H Bennett; Peter P Egeghy; Peter Fantke; Lei Huang; Kristin K Isaacs; Olivier Jolliet; Katherine A Phillips; Paul S Price; Hyeong-Moo Shin; John N Westgate; R Woodrow Setzer; John F Wambaugh Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2018-12-24 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Zachary Stanfield; R Woodrow Setzer; Victoria Hull; Risa R Sayre; Kristin K Isaacs; John F Wambaugh Journal: J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 6.371
Authors: Joshua W Smith; Robert N O'Meally; Derek K Ng; Jian-Guo Chen; Thomas W Kensler; Robert N Cole; John D Groopman Journal: Chem Res Toxicol Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 3.973
Authors: Jon R Sobus; Robert S DeWoskin; Yu-Mei Tan; Joachim D Pleil; Martin Blake Phillips; Barbara Jane George; Krista Christensen; Dina M Schreinemachers; Marc A Williams; Elaine A Cohen Hubal; Stephen W Edwards Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2015-04-10 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Martine Vrijheid; Rémy Slama; Oliver Robinson; Leda Chatzi; Muireann Coen; Peter van den Hazel; Cathrine Thomsen; John Wright; Toby J Athersuch; Narcis Avellana; Xavier Basagaña; Celine Brochot; Luca Bucchini; Mariona Bustamante; Angel Carracedo; Maribel Casas; Xavier Estivill; Lesley Fairley; Diana van Gent; Juan R Gonzalez; Berit Granum; Regina Gražulevičienė; Kristine B Gutzkow; Jordi Julvez; Hector C Keun; Manolis Kogevinas; Rosemary R C McEachan; Helle Margrete Meltzer; Eduard Sabidó; Per E Schwarze; Valérie Siroux; Jordi Sunyer; Elizabeth J Want; Florence Zeman; Mark J Nieuwenhuijsen Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Beric M Gilbert; Ebrahim Hussain; Franz Jirsa; Annemariè Avenant-Oldewage Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-06-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Elaine A Cohen Hubal; Barbara A Wetmore; John F Wambaugh; Hisham El-Masri; Jon R Sobus; Tina Bahadori Journal: J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 5.563
Authors: Tyler A Jacobson; Jasdeep S Kler; Yeunook Bae; Jiexi Chen; Daniel T Ladror; Ramsunder Iyer; Denise A Nunes; Nathan D Montgomery; Joachim D Pleil; William E Funk Journal: J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol Date: 2022-08-13 Impact factor: 6.371