Literature DB >> 27211295

Bayesian methods for uncertainty factor application for derivation of reference values.

Ted W Simon1, Yiliang Zhu2, Michael L Dourson3, Nancy B Beck4.   

Abstract

In 2014, the National Research Council (NRC) published Review of EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Process that considers methods EPA uses for developing toxicity criteria for non-carcinogens. These criteria are the Reference Dose (RfD) for oral exposure and Reference Concentration (RfC) for inhalation exposure. The NRC Review suggested using Bayesian methods for application of uncertainty factors (UFs) to adjust the point of departure dose or concentration to a level considered to be without adverse effects for the human population. The NRC foresaw Bayesian methods would be potentially useful for combining toxicity data from disparate sources-high throughput assays, animal testing, and observational epidemiology. UFs represent five distinct areas for which both adjustment and consideration of uncertainty may be needed. NRC suggested UFs could be represented as Bayesian prior distributions, illustrated the use of a log-normal distribution to represent the composite UF, and combined this distribution with a log-normal distribution representing uncertainty in the point of departure (POD) to reflect the overall uncertainty. Here, we explore these suggestions and present a refinement of the methodology suggested by NRC that considers each individual UF as a distribution. From an examination of 24 evaluations from EPA's IRIS program, when individual UFs were represented using this approach, the geometric mean fold change in the value of the RfD or RfC increased from 3 to over 30, depending on the number of individual UFs used and the sophistication of the assessment. We present example calculations and recommendations for implementing the refined NRC methodology.
Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian methods; Hazard assessment; Reference concentration; Reference dose; Risk assessment; Uncertainty factor

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27211295     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.05.018

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


  4 in total

1.  Evaluation and calibration of high-throughput predictions of chemical distribution to tissues.

Authors:  Robert G Pearce; R Woodrow Setzer; Jimena L Davis; John F Wambaugh
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2017-10-14       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  Application of qualitative and quantitative uncertainty assessment tools in developing ranges of plausible toxicity values for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.

Authors:  Daniele Wikoff; Laurie Haws; Caroline Ring; Robert Budinsky
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2019-06-30       Impact factor: 3.446

3.  Beyond the RfD: Broad Application of a Probabilistic Approach to Improve Chemical Dose-Response Assessments for Noncancer Effects.

Authors:  Weihsueh A Chiu; Daniel A Axelrad; Chimeddulam Dalaijamts; Chris Dockins; Kan Shao; Andrew J Shapiro; Greg Paoli
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 9.031

4.  Application of a unified probabilistic framework to the dose-response assessment of acrolein.

Authors:  Todd Blessinger; Allen Davis; Weihsueh A Chiu; John Stanek; George M Woodall; Jeff Gift; Kristina A Thayer; David Bussard
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2020-08-05       Impact factor: 13.352

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.