Jonathan Suhl1, Stephanie Leonard2, Peter Weyer3, Anthony Rhoads1, Anna Maria Siega-Riz4, T Renée Anthony2, Trudy L Burns1, Kristin M Conway1, Peter H Langlois5, Paul A Romitti1. 1. Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 2. Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 3. Center for Health Effects of Environmental Contamination, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 4. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. 5. Birth Defects Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch, Texas Department of State Health Services, Austin, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Arsenic is widely distributed in the environment in both inorganic and organic forms. Evidence from animal studies suggests that maternal inorganic arsenic may lead to the development of orofacial clefts (OFC)s in offspring. This evidence, together with the limited epidemiologic data available, supports the need for a comprehensive examination of major sources of arsenic exposure and OFCs in humans. METHODS: Using interview data collected in the National Birth Defects Prevention Study, public and well water arsenic sampling data, and dietary arsenic estimates, we compared expert-rater assessed occupational arsenic exposure, individual-level exposure to arsenic through drinking water, and dietary arsenic exposure between mothers of OFC cases (N = 435) and unaffected controls (N = 1267). Associations for each source of exposure were estimated for cleft lip ± palate (CL/P) and cleft palate (CP) using unconditional logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Associations for maternal drinking water arsenic exposure and CL/P were near or below unity, whereas those for dietary arsenic exposure tended to be positive. For CP, positive associations were observed for maternal occupational arsenic and inorganic arsenic exposures, with confidence intervals that excluded the null value, whereas those for drinking water or dietary arsenic exposures tended to be near or below unity. CONCLUSIONS: Positive associations were observed for maternal occupational arsenic exposure and CP and for maternal dietary arsenic exposure and CL/P; the remainder of associations estimated tended to be near or below unity. Given the exploratory nature of our study, the results should be interpreted cautiously, and continued research using improved exposure assessment methodologies is recommended.
BACKGROUND:Arsenic is widely distributed in the environment in both inorganic and organic forms. Evidence from animal studies suggests that maternal inorganic arsenic may lead to the development of orofacial clefts (OFC)s in offspring. This evidence, together with the limited epidemiologic data available, supports the need for a comprehensive examination of major sources of arsenic exposure and OFCs in humans. METHODS: Using interview data collected in the National Birth DefectsPrevention Study, public and well waterarsenic sampling data, and dietary arsenic estimates, we compared expert-rater assessed occupational arsenic exposure, individual-level exposure to arsenic through drinking water, and dietary arsenic exposure between mothers of OFC cases (N = 435) and unaffected controls (N = 1267). Associations for each source of exposure were estimated for cleft lip ± palate (CL/P) and cleft palate (CP) using unconditional logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Associations for maternal drinking waterarsenic exposure and CL/P were near or below unity, whereas those for dietary arsenic exposure tended to be positive. For CP, positive associations were observed for maternal occupational arsenic and inorganic arsenic exposures, with confidence intervals that excluded the null value, whereas those for drinking water or dietary arsenic exposures tended to be near or below unity. CONCLUSIONS:Positive associations were observed for maternal occupational arsenic exposure and CP and for maternal dietary arsenic exposure and CL/P; the remainder of associations estimated tended to be near or below unity. Given the exploratory nature of our study, the results should be interpreted cautiously, and continued research using improved exposure assessment methodologies is recommended.
Authors: R A Schoof; L J Yost; J Eickhoff; E A Crecelius; D W Cragin; D M Meacher; D B Menzel Journal: Food Chem Toxicol Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 6.023
Authors: Jean D Brender; Lucina Suarez; Marilyn Felkner; Zunera Gilani; David Stinchcomb; Karen Moody; Judy Henry; Katherine Hendricks Journal: Environ Res Date: 2005-09-19 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Maitreyi Mazumdar; Linda Valeri; Ema G Rodrigues; Md Omar Sharif Ibne Hasan; Rezina Hamid; Ligi Paul; Jacob Selhub; Fareesa Silva; Md Golam Mostofa; Quazi Quamruzzaman; Mahmuder Rahman; David C Christiani Journal: Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol Date: 2015-08-06
Authors: Jonathan Suhl; Paul A Romitti; Yanyan Cao; Carissa M Rocheleau; Trudy L Burns; Kristin Conway; Preetha Rajaraman; A J Agopian; Patricia Stewart Journal: Birth Defects Res Date: 2018-01-23 Impact factor: 2.344
Authors: Jonathan Suhl; Kristin M Conway; Anthony Rhoads; Peter H Langlois; Marcia L Feldkamp; Adrian Michalski; Paul A Romitti Journal: Birth Defects Res Date: 2019-12-21 Impact factor: 2.661