Literature DB >> 25090576

Changes in epidemiologic associations with different exposure metrics: a case study of phthalate exposure associations with body mass index and waist circumference.

Krista Christensen1, Jon Sobus2, Martin Phillips3, Todd Blessinger1, Matthew Lorber1, Yu-Mei Tan2.   

Abstract

The use of human biomonitoring data to characterize exposure to environmental contaminants in epidemiology studies has expanded greatly in recent years. Substantial variability in effect measures may arise when using different exposure metrics for a given contaminant, and it is often not clear which metric is the best surrogate for the 'causal' or 'true' exposure. Here we evaluated variability and potential bias in epidemiologic associations resulting from the use of different phthalate exposure metrics in the 2009-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). We examined associations between urinary phthalate metabolites and the outcomes of body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC). We examined each of the following NHANES-derived exposure metrics for metabolites of individual phthalates: molar excretion rate (nmol/min), molar amount (nmol), molar concentration (nmol/mL, with and without additional model adjustment for creatinine), creatinine corrected molar concentration (nmol/g creatinine), and reconstructed daily phthalate intake (nmol/kg/day). In order to investigate potential biasing effect of each metric, we first assumed that daily intake of the parent phthalate is the causal exposure. We then constructed a simulated population based on the 2009-2010 NHANES, and randomly assigned each individual a di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) intake dose based on a published distribution, but independent of any other factor. Accordingly, all associations between these randomly assigned intake doses and individuals' BMI and WC should be null. Next, demographic data in the NHANES were incorporated into a pharmacokinetic model to predict urinary molar excretions of five DEHP metabolites based on the randomly assigned DEHP intake. The predicted molar excretions were then used to calculate the same exposure metrics listed above. Three exposure metrics (randomly generated intake, excretion rate, urine concentration) showed no significant associations with BMI, which supports the null hypothesis stated above. In contrast, metrics adjusted for creatinine showed a significant negative correlation, and reconstructed daily intake showed a significant positive correlation, indicating the introduction of bias away from the true (i.e., null) association. Interestingly, trends in the simulation analysis were similar to those seen in the observed NHANES data. Our findings show that, at least in this example case, the choice of exposure metric can introduce significant bias of varying magnitude and direction into the calculation of epidemiologic associations. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BMI; Bias; Exposure metric; Phthalates; WC

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25090576     DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2014.07.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Int        ISSN: 0160-4120            Impact factor:   9.621


  15 in total

Review 1.  Exposure assessment issues in epidemiology studies of phthalates.

Authors:  Lauren E Johns; Glinda S Cooper; Audrey Galizia; John D Meeker
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 9.621

2.  Association of arsenic with kidney function in adolescents and young adults: Results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2009-2012.

Authors:  Darcy Weidemann; Chin-Chi Kuo; Ana Navas-Acien; Alison G Abraham; Virginia Weaver; Jeffrey Fadrowski
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 6.498

Review 3.  Challenges for environmental epidemiology research: are biomarker concentrations altered by kidney function or urine concentration adjustment?

Authors:  Virginia M Weaver; Dennis J Kotchmar; Jeffrey J Fadrowski; Ellen K Silbergeld
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 5.563

Review 4.  Lipid and Creatinine Adjustment to Evaluate Health Effects of Environmental Exposures.

Authors:  Katie M O'Brien; Kristen Upson; Jessie P Buckley
Journal:  Curr Environ Health Rep       Date:  2017-03

Review 5.  Biomonitoring of inorganic arsenic species in pregnancy.

Authors:  Jillian Ashley-Martin; Mandy Fisher; Patrick Belanger; Ciprian Mihai Cirtiu; Tye E Arbuckle
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2022-08-10       Impact factor: 6.371

6.  A Novel Method for Calculating Potency-Weighted Cumulative Phthalates Exposure with Implications for Identifying Racial/Ethnic Disparities among U.S. Reproductive-Aged Women in NHANES 2001-2012.

Authors:  Julia R Varshavsky; Ami R Zota; Tracey J Woodruff
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 9.028

7.  Dietary sources of cumulative phthalates exposure among the U.S. general population in NHANES 2005-2014.

Authors:  Julia R Varshavsky; Rachel Morello-Frosch; Tracey J Woodruff; Ami R Zota
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2018-03-29       Impact factor: 9.621

8.  Phthalate exposure and odds of bacterial vaginosis among U.S. reproductive-aged women, NHANES 2001-2004.

Authors:  Ruth J Geller; Rebecca M Brotman; Katie M O'Brien; Derek M Fine; Ami R Zota
Journal:  Reprod Toxicol       Date:  2018-09-09       Impact factor: 3.143

9.  Temporal Trends in Exposures to Six Phthalates from Biomonitoring Data: Implications for Cumulative Risk.

Authors:  Jeanette M Reyes; Paul S Price
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 11.357

Review 10.  Uses of NHANES Biomarker Data for Chemical Risk Assessment: Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.