Literature DB >> 8406942

Use of biologic markers for toxic end-points in assessment of risks from exposure to chemicals.

M J Mercier1, A E Robinson.   

Abstract

Biologic markers are familiar tools for monitoring human absorption of, and reaction to, potentially toxic chemicals. The concept of applying biologic markers to the risk assessment process is a natural, but more recent, development and the principles remain to be fully elaborated. Biologic markers may be measurements of exposure, of effects, of genetic or induced sensitivity or of disease. The ideal biologic marker for risk assessment purposes is a quantitative measurement of a chemical, biochemical, functional or morphological change in the system that is initiated by a chemical and which results in pathologic change and overt toxicity. It follows that some understanding of the mechanism of toxicity and of dose-response relationships are pre-requisite for selection of suitable biologic markers for use in risk assessment. Where biologic markers for toxicity are common between mammalian species, extrapolation of data for quantitative risk assessment purposes becomes more reasonable. In the field of carcinogenesis, some DNA and protein adducts have been proposed as biologic markers for assessment of risk associated with exposure to genotoxic carcinogens. However, less progress is evident in relation to other toxic end-points including those for pulmonary, reproductive, immuno- and neuro-toxicity, despite intensive efforts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8406942     DOI: 10.1007/bf00381300

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health        ISSN: 0340-0131            Impact factor:   3.015


  3 in total

1.  Biological markers in environmental health research. Committee on Biological Markers of the National Research Council.

Authors: 
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 9.031

2.  Biologic markers in risk assessment for environmental carcinogens.

Authors:  F Perera; J Mayer; R M Santella; D Brenner; A Jeffrey; L Latriano; S Smith; D Warburton; T L Young; W Y Tsai
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 3.  Validation of biological markers for quantitative risk assessment.

Authors:  P Schulte; L F Mazzuckelli
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 9.031

  3 in total
  2 in total

Review 1.  The neurobehavioral impact of manganese: results and challenges obtained by a meta-analysis of individual participant data.

Authors:  Monika Meyer-Baron; Michael Schäper; Guido Knapp; Roberto Lucchini; Silvia Zoni; Rita Bast-Pettersen; Dag G Ellingsen; Yngvar Thomassen; Shuchang He; Hong Yuan; Qiao Niu; Xian-Liang Wang; Yong-Jian Yang; Anders Iregren; Bengt Sjögren; Morten Blond; Peter Laursen; Bo Netterstrom; Donna Mergler; Rosemarie Bowler; Christoph van Thriel
Journal:  Neurotoxicology       Date:  2013-02-16       Impact factor: 4.294

2.  Biological exposure indices of pyrrole adducts in serum and urine for hazard assessment of n-hexane exposure.

Authors:  Hongyin Yin; Chunling Zhang; Ying Guo; Xiaoying Shao; Tao Zeng; Xiulan Zhao; Keqin Xie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.