Literature DB >> 22057094

The human relevant potency threshold: reducing uncertainty by human calibration of cumulative risk assessments.

C J Borgert1, E V Sargent, G Casella, D R Dietrich, L S McCarty, R J Golden.   

Abstract

The 2008 National Research Council report "Phthalates and Cumulative Risk Assessment: Tasks Ahead," rejected the underlying premises of TEQ-like approaches - e.g., chemicals are true congeners; are metabolized and detoxified similarly; produce the same biological effects by the same mode of action; exhibit parallel dose response curves - instead asserting that cumulative risk assessment should apply dose addition (DA) to all chemicals that produce "common adverse outcomes" (CAOS). Published mixtures data and a human health risk assessment for phthalates and anti-androgens were evaluated to determine how firmly the DA-CAOS concept is supported and with what level of statistical certainty the results may be extrapolated to lower doses in humans. Underlying assumptions of the DA-CAOS concept were tested for accuracy and consistency against data for two human pharmaceuticals and its logical predictions were compared to human clinical and epidemiological experience. Those analyses revealed that DA-CAOS is scientifically untenable. Therefore, an alternative approach was developed - the Human-Relevant Potency-Threshold (HRPT) - that appears to fit the data better and avoids the contradictions inherent in the DA-CAOS concept. The proposed approach recommends application of independent action for phthalates and other chemicals with potential anti-androgenic properties at current human exposure levels. Copyright Â
© 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22057094     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2011.10.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  12 in total

1.  Policy decisions on endocrine disruptors should be based on science across disciplines: a response to Dietrich et al.

Authors:  A C Gore; J Balthazart; D Bikle; D O Carpenter; D Crews; P Czernichow; E Diamanti-Kandarakis; R M Dores; D Grattan; P R Hof; A N Hollenberg; C Lange; A V Lee; J E Levine; R P Millar; R J Nelson; M Porta; M Poth; D M Power; G S Prins; E C Ridgway; E F Rissman; J A Romijn; P E Sawchenko; P D Sly; O Söder; H S Taylor; M Tena-Sempere; H Vaudry; K Wallen; Z Wang; L Wartofsky; C S Watson
Journal:  Endocrinology       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 4.736

Review 2.  Peer-reviewed and unbiased research, rather than 'sound science', should be used to evaluate endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

Authors:  Leonardo Trasande; Laura N Vandenberg; Jean-Pierre Bourguignon; John Peterson Myers; Remy Slama; Frederick Vom Saal; Robert Thomas Zoeller
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 3.  Assessing the Public Health Implications of the Food Preservative Propylparaben: Has This Chemical Been Safely Used for Decades.

Authors:  Laura N Vandenberg; Jennifer Bugos
Journal:  Curr Environ Health Rep       Date:  2021-01-08

4.  Predicting estrogen receptor activation by a group of substituted phenols: An integrated approach to testing and assessment case study.

Authors:  Francina Webster; Matthew Gagné; Grace Patlewicz; Prachi Pradeep; Nicholas Trefiak; Richard S Judson; Tara S Barton-Maclaren
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 3.271

Review 5.  A critique of the European Commission document, "State of the Art Assessment of Endocrine Disrupters".

Authors:  Lorenz R Rhomberg; Julie E Goodman; Warren G Foster; Christopher J Borgert; Glen Van Der Kraak
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 5.635

6.  A path forward in the debate over health impacts of endocrine disrupting chemicals.

Authors:  R Thomas Zoeller; Åke Bergman; Georg Becher; Poul Bjerregaard; Riana Bornman; Ingvar Brandt; Taisen Iguchi; Susan Jobling; Karen A Kidd; Andreas Kortenkamp; Niels E Skakkebaek; Jorma Toppari; Laura N Vandenberg
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2014-12-22       Impact factor: 5.984

7.  A computational approach to evaluate the androgenic affinity of iprodione, procymidone, vinclozolin and their metabolites.

Authors:  Corrado Lodovico Galli; Cristina Sensi; Amos Fumagalli; Chiara Parravicini; Marina Marinovich; Ivano Eberini
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-11       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  An Overview of Literature Topics Related to Current Concepts, Methods, Tools, and Applications for Cumulative Risk Assessment (2007-2016).

Authors:  Mary A Fox; L Elizabeth Brewer; Lawrence Martin
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 9.  Advancing human health risk assessment: integrating recent advisory committee recommendations.

Authors:  Michael Dourson; Richard A Becker; Lynne T Haber; Lynn H Pottenger; Tiffany Bredfeldt; Penelope A Fenner-Crisp
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.635

10.  Human-relevant potency threshold (HRPT) for ERα agonism.

Authors:  Christopher J Borgert; John C Matthews; Stephen P Baker
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2018-04-09       Impact factor: 5.153

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.