Literature DB >> 34718822

Advances in Assessing Hazard and Risk to Emerging Threats and Emergency Response: Comparing and Contrasting Efforts of 3 Federal Agencies.

Moiz M Mumtaz1, Rich A Nickle2, Jason C Lambert3, Mark S Johnson4.   

Abstract

Federal statutes authorize several agencies to protect human populations from chemical emergencies and provide guidance to evacuate, clean, and reoccupy affected areas. Each of the authorized federal agencies has developed programs to provide managers, public health officials, and regulators, with a rapid assessment of potential hazards and risks associated with chemical emergencies. Emergency responses vary based on exposure scenarios, routes, temporal considerations, and the substance(s) present. Traditional chemical assessments and derivation of toxicity values are time-intensive, typically requiring large amounts of human epidemiological and experimental animal data. When a rapid assessment of health effects is needed, an integrated computational approach of augmenting extant toxicity data with in vitro (new alternative toxicity testing methods) data can provide a quick, evidence-based solution. In so doing, multiple streams of data can be used, including literature searches, hazard, dose-response, physicochemical, environmental fate, transport property data, in vitro cell bioactivity testing, and toxicogenomics. The field of toxicology is moving, towards increased use of this approach as it transforms from observational to predictive science. The challenge is to objectively and transparently derive toxicity values using this approach to protect human health and the environment. Presented here are examples and efforts toward rapid risk assessment that demonstrate unified, parallel, and complementary work to provide timely protection in times of chemical emergency. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Toxicology 2021. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.

Entities:  

Keywords:  NAMs; alternative toxicity testing; computational tools; emergency response; federal agencies; risk assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34718822      PMCID: PMC9041561          DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfab126

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Toxicol Sci        ISSN: 1096-0929            Impact factor:   4.109


  14 in total

Review 1.  The precautionary principle also applies to public health actions.

Authors:  B D Goldstein
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Acute health reference values: overview, perspective, and current forecast of needs.

Authors:  George M Woodall
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health A       Date:  2005 Jun 11-25

Review 3.  Accelerating the Pace of Chemical Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Robert J Kavlock; Tina Bahadori; Tara S Barton-Maclaren; Maureen R Gwinn; Mike Rasenberg; Russell S Thomas
Journal:  Chem Res Toxicol       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 3.739

4.  Toward development of occupational exposure levels for insensitive munition components.

Authors:  Mark S Johnson
Journal:  Toxicol Ind Health       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 2.273

5.  Toxicity Assessment of 4-Methyl-1-cyclohexanemethanol and Its Metabolites in Response to a Recent Chemical Spill in West Virginia, USA.

Authors:  Jiaqi Lan; Man Hu; Ce Gao; Akram Alshawabkeh; April Z Gu
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2015-05-11       Impact factor: 9.028

6.  Analysis of eight oil spill dispersants using rapid, in vitro tests for endocrine and other biological activity.

Authors:  Richard S Judson; Matthew T Martin; David M Reif; Keith A Houck; Thomas B Knudsen; Daniel M Rotroff; Menghang Xia; Srilatha Sakamuru; Ruili Huang; Paul Shinn; Christopher P Austin; Robert J Kavlock; David J Dix
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2010-08-01       Impact factor: 9.028

7.  Six interaction profiles for simple mixtures.

Authors:  Hana R Pohl; Nickolette Roney; Sharon Wilbur; Hugh Hansen; Christopher T De Rosa
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 7.086

Review 8.  Non-animal methods to predict skin sensitization (II): an assessment of defined approaches *.

Authors:  Nicole C Kleinstreuer; Sebastian Hoffmann; Nathalie Alépée; David Allen; Takao Ashikaga; Warren Casey; Elodie Clouet; Magalie Cluzel; Bertrand Desprez; Nichola Gellatly; Carsten Göbel; Petra S Kern; Martina Klaric; Jochen Kühnl; Silvia Martinozzi-Teissier; Karsten Mewes; Masaaki Miyazawa; Judy Strickland; Erwin van Vliet; Qingda Zang; Dirk Petersohn
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2018-02-23       Impact factor: 5.635

9.  Novel transcriptome assembly and comparative toxicity pathway analysis in mahi-mahi (Coryphaena hippurus) embryos and larvae exposed to Deepwater Horizon oil.

Authors:  Elvis Genbo Xu; Edward M Mager; Martin Grosell; E Starr Hazard; Gary Hardiman; Daniel Schlenk
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  QSAR models of human data can enrich or replace LLNA testing for human skin sensitization.

Authors:  Vinicius M Alves; Stephen J Capuzzi; Eugene Muratov; Rodolpho C Braga; Thomas Thornton; Denis Fourches; Judy Strickland; Nicole Kleinstreuer; Carolina H Andrade; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Green Chem       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 10.182

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.