Stephanie M Eick1, John D Meeker2, Phil Brown3, Andrea Swartzendruber1, Rafael Rios-McConnell4, Ye Shen1, Ginger L Milne5, Carmen Vélez Vega4, Zaira Rosario4, Akram Alshawabkeh6, José F Cordero1, Kelly K Ferguson7. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, 101 Buck Road, Athens, GA, 30329, United States. 2. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Hts, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States. 3. Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute, Northeastern University, 318 INV 360 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA, 02115, United States. 4. University of Puerto Rico Graduate School of Public Health, UPR Medical Sciences Campus, Paseo Dr. Jose Celso Barbosa, PO Box 365067, San Juan, PR, 00936-5067, United States. 5. Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 562 Preston Research Bldg, 2200 Pierce Avenue, Nashville, TN, 37232-6602, United States. 6. College of Engineering, Northeastern University, 501 ST 360 Huntington Ave. Boston MA, 02115-500, United States. 7. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Hts, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States; Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, 111 TW Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, United States. Electronic address: kelly.ferguson2@nih.gov.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lower socioeconomic status (SES) and psychosocial stress during pregnancy have been associated with adverse birth outcomes. While hypothalamic-pituitary-axis activation is thought to be the primary driver, oxidative stress may also be involved mechanistically. We used data from the Puerto Rico Testsite for Exploring Contamination Threats (PROTECT) cohort (N=476) to examine associations between self-reported psychosocial stress measures, SES indicators, and urinary oxidative stress biomarker concentrations, hypothesizing that women with lower SES and increased psychosocial stress would have elevated oxidative stress biomarkers. METHODS: Maternal age, education, marital status, insurance status, alcohol use and smoking status were obtained via self-reported questionnaires and were used as indicators of SES. Perceived stress, depression, negative life experiences, neighborhood perceptions, and social support were self-reported in questionnaires administered during pregnancy. Responses were grouped into tertiles for analysis, where the highest tertile corresponded to highest level of psychosocial stress. Urinary concentrations of 8-iso-prostaglandin F2α (8-iso-PGF2α) and its primary metabolite were measured at three study visits (median 18, 24, 28 weeks gestation) and averaged to reflect oxidative stress across pregnancy. Linear models were used to examine associations between SES indicators, tertiles of psychosocial stress and oxidative stress biomarkers. RESULTS: Average levels of 8-iso-PGF2α and the 8-iso-PGF2α metabolite were higher among pregnant women who were younger, who had public compared to private insurance, and who were unemployed compared to employed. However, no associations were observed between psychosocial stress measures and biomarker concentrations in adjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial stress during pregnancy, as indicated by self-reported questionnaire measures, was not associated with biomarkers of oxidative stress in the PROTECT study. However, results suggest that these biomarkers are elevated among women of lower SES, which is typically associated with stress. Notably, compared to other populations, self-reported psychosocial stress measures were lower in PROTECT compared to other populations. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Lower socioeconomic status (SES) and psychosocial stress during pregnancy have been associated with adverse birth outcomes. While hypothalamic-pituitary-axis activation is thought to be the primary driver, oxidative stress may also be involved mechanistically. We used data from the Puerto Rico Testsite for Exploring Contamination Threats (PROTECT) cohort (N=476) to examine associations between self-reported psychosocial stress measures, SES indicators, and urinary oxidative stress biomarker concentrations, hypothesizing that women with lower SES and increased psychosocial stress would have elevated oxidative stress biomarkers. METHODS: Maternal age, education, marital status, insurance status, alcohol use and smoking status were obtained via self-reported questionnaires and were used as indicators of SES. Perceived stress, depression, negative life experiences, neighborhood perceptions, and social support were self-reported in questionnaires administered during pregnancy. Responses were grouped into tertiles for analysis, where the highest tertile corresponded to highest level of psychosocial stress. Urinary concentrations of 8-iso-prostaglandin F2α (8-iso-PGF2α) and its primary metabolite were measured at three study visits (median 18, 24, 28 weeks gestation) and averaged to reflect oxidative stress across pregnancy. Linear models were used to examine associations between SES indicators, tertiles of psychosocial stress and oxidative stress biomarkers. RESULTS: Average levels of 8-iso-PGF2α and the 8-iso-PGF2α metabolite were higher among pregnant women who were younger, who had public compared to private insurance, and who were unemployed compared to employed. However, no associations were observed between psychosocial stress measures and biomarker concentrations in adjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS:Psychosocial stress during pregnancy, as indicated by self-reported questionnaire measures, was not associated with biomarkers of oxidative stress in the PROTECT study. However, results suggest that these biomarkers are elevated among women of lower SES, which is typically associated with stress. Notably, compared to other populations, self-reported psychosocial stress measures were lower in PROTECT compared to other populations. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Isoprostanes; Oxidative stress; Pregnancy; Psychosocial stress; Social determinants
Authors: Pamela H Mitchell; Lynda Powell; James Blumenthal; Jennifer Norten; Gail Ironson; Carol Rogers Pitula; Erika Sivarajan Froelicher; Susan Czajkowski; Marston Youngblood; Marc Huber; Lisa F Berkman Journal: J Cardiopulm Rehabil Date: 2003 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.081
Authors: Roni W Kobrosly; Lauren E Parlett; Richard W Stahlhut; Emily S Barrett; Shanna H Swan Journal: Environ Res Date: 2012-04-01 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Stephanie M Eick; Emily S Barrett; Thomas J van 't Erve; Ruby H N Nguyen; Nicole R Bush; Ginger Milne; Shanna H Swan; Kelly K Ferguson Journal: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol Date: 2018-03-30 Impact factor: 3.980
Authors: Kelly K Ferguson; Thomas F McElrath; Yin-Hsiu Chen; Bhramar Mukherjee; John D Meeker Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2014-11-14 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Stephanie M Eick; Kelly K Ferguson; Ginger L Milne; Rafael Rios-McConnell; Carmen Vélez-Vega; Zaira Rosario; Akram Alshawabkeh; José F Cordero; John D Meeker Journal: Free Radic Biol Med Date: 2019-11-05 Impact factor: 7.376
Authors: Stephanie M Eick; Sarah Dee Geiger; Akram Alshawabkeh; Max Aung; Emily Barrett; Nicole R Bush; José F Cordero; Kelly K Ferguson; John D Meeker; Ginger L Milne; Ruby H N Nguyen; Amy M Padula; Sheela Sathyanarayana; Barrett M Welch; Susan L Schantz; Tracey J Woodruff; Rachel Morello-Frosch Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2022-04-29 Impact factor: 10.753
Authors: Pahriya Ashrap; Amira Aker; Deborah J Watkins; Bhramar Mukherjee; Zaira Rosario-Pabón; Carmen M Vélez-Vega; Akram Alshawabkeh; José F Cordero; John D Meeker Journal: Environ Int Date: 2021-02-03 Impact factor: 13.352