Jordan R Kuiper1, Katie M O'Brien2, Kelly K Ferguson2, Jessie P Buckley3. 1. Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: jkuiper1@jhmi.edu. 2. Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. 3. Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Urinary biomarkers are often corrected for sample dilution using creatinine, which is influenced by sociodemographic factors and certain health conditions. It is unknown whether these factors similarly influence specific gravity. OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of specific gravity and creatinine and compare methods for correcting estimated chemical concentrations for sample dilution using these measures. METHODS: We assessed predictors of urinary specific gravity and creatinine among NHANES 2007-2008 participants (n = 7257). We corrected concentrations of mono-n-butyl phthalate (MnBP) for dilution using two methods, each applied to both specific gravity and creatinine: correction using a sample mean of the dilution indicator (i.e., specific gravity or creatinine) and covariate-adjusted standardization. We compared distributions and assessed the agreement of uncorrected or corrected concentrations visually using Bland-Altman plots and statistically by Kendall's τa. We stratified all analyses by age category (i.e., 6-19 or 20+ years of age). RESULTS: Gender, race/ethnicity, body mass index, and height were associated with urinary specific gravity and creatinine. Distributions of corrected MnBP concentrations were comparable for both methods and dilution indicators, but agreement between methods was greater for specific gravity. Additionally, specific gravity- and creatinine-corrected MnBP concentrations had slightly greater agreement with each other when corrected using a covariate-adjusted standardization method. DISCUSSION: Specific gravity, like creatinine, is associated with sociodemographic and body composition variables. Accounting for these factors as part of the dilution correction method may be important to minimize bias.
BACKGROUND: Urinary biomarkers are often corrected for sample dilution using creatinine, which is influenced by sociodemographic factors and certain health conditions. It is unknown whether these factors similarly influence specific gravity. OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of specific gravity and creatinine and compare methods for correcting estimated chemical concentrations for sample dilution using these measures. METHODS: We assessed predictors of urinary specific gravity and creatinine among NHANES 2007-2008 participants (n = 7257). We corrected concentrations of mono-n-butyl phthalate (MnBP) for dilution using two methods, each applied to both specific gravity and creatinine: correction using a sample mean of the dilution indicator (i.e., specific gravity or creatinine) and covariate-adjusted standardization. We compared distributions and assessed the agreement of uncorrected or corrected concentrations visually using Bland-Altman plots and statistically by Kendall's τa. We stratified all analyses by age category (i.e., 6-19 or 20+ years of age). RESULTS: Gender, race/ethnicity, body mass index, and height were associated with urinary specific gravity and creatinine. Distributions of corrected MnBP concentrations were comparable for both methods and dilution indicators, but agreement between methods was greater for specific gravity. Additionally, specific gravity- and creatinine-corrected MnBP concentrations had slightly greater agreement with each other when corrected using a covariate-adjusted standardization method. DISCUSSION: Specific gravity, like creatinine, is associated with sociodemographic and body composition variables. Accounting for these factors as part of the dilution correction method may be important to minimize bias.
Authors: Zorimar Rivera-Núñez; Carolyn W Kinkade; Yingting Zhang; Amber Rockson; Elisa V Bandera; Adana A M Llanos; Emily S Barrett Journal: Curr Environ Health Rep Date: 2022-07-22
Authors: Wei-Jen Chen; Candace Robledo; Erin M Davis; Jean R Goodman; Chao Xu; Jooyeon Hwang; Amanda E Janitz; Tabitha Garwe; Antonia M Calafat; Jennifer D Peck Journal: Environ Res Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 8.431
Authors: Jordan R Kuiper; Katie M O'Brien; Barrett M Welch; Emily S Barrett; Ruby H N Nguyen; Sheela Sathyanarayana; Ginger L Milne; Shanna H Swan; Kelly K Ferguson; Jessie P Buckley Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 4.860
Authors: Michal Ješeta; Kateřina Franzová; Simona Machynová; Jiří Kalina; Jiří Kohoutek; Lenka Mekiňová; Igor Crha; Bartosz Kempisty; Marek Kašík; Jana Žáková; Pavel Ventruba; Jana Navrátilová Journal: Toxics Date: 2022-06-09
Authors: Angel D Davalos; Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón; Thomas J van T' Erve; Alexander P Keil; Paige L Williams; John D Meeker; Ginger L Milne; Shanshan Zhao; Russ Hauser; Kelly K Ferguson Journal: Environ Res Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 8.431
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: Zlatan Feric; Nicolas Bohm Agostini; Daniel Beene; Antonio J Signes-Pastor; Yuliya Halchenko; Deborah Watkins; Debra MacKenzie; Margaret Karagas; Justin Manjourides; Akram Alshawabkeh; David Kaeli Journal: Proc IEEE Int Conf Big Data Date: 2021-12
Authors: Rebekah L Petroff; Vasantha Padmanabhan; Dana C Dolinoy; Deborah J Watkins; Joseph Ciarelli; Diana Haggerty; Douglas M Ruden; Jaclyn M Goodrich Journal: Front Genet Date: 2022-03-31 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Jessie P Buckley; Jordan R Kuiper; Deborah H Bennett; Emily S Barrett; Tracy Bastain; Carrie V Breton; Sridhar Chinthakindi; Anne L Dunlop; Shohreh F Farzan; Julie B Herbstman; Margaret R Karagas; Carmen J Marsit; John D Meeker; Rachel Morello-Frosch; Thomas G O'Connor; Megan E Romano; Susan Schantz; Rebecca J Schmidt; Deborah J Watkins; Hongkai Zhu; Edo D Pellizzari; Kurunthachalam Kannan; Tracey J Woodruff Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2022-05-10 Impact factor: 11.357