Back to Search Start Over

A Novel Approach to Chemical Mixture Risk Assessment—Linking Data from Population-Based Epidemiology and Experimental Animal Tests

Authors :
Bornehag, Carl-Gustaf
Kitraki, Efthymia
Stamatakis, Antonios
Panagiotidou, Emily
Rudén, Christina
Shu, Huan
Lindh, Christian
Ruegg, Joelle
Gennings, Chris
Bornehag, Carl-Gustaf
Kitraki, Efthymia
Stamatakis, Antonios
Panagiotidou, Emily
Rudén, Christina
Shu, Huan
Lindh, Christian
Ruegg, Joelle
Gennings, Chris
Publication Year :
2019

Abstract

Humans are continuously exposed to chemicals with suspected or proven endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). Risk management of EDCs presents a major unmet challenge because the available data for adverse health effects are generated by examining one compound at a time, whereas real-life exposures are to mixtures of chemicals. In this work, we integrate epidemiological and experimental evidence toward a whole mixture strategy for risk assessment. To illustrate, we conduct the following four steps in a case study: (1) identification of single EDCs (“bad actors”)—measured in prenatal blood/urine in the SELMA study—that are associated with a shorter anogenital distance (AGD) in baby boys; (2) definition and construction of a “typical” mixture consisting of the “bad actors” identified in Step 1; (3) experimentally testing this mixture in an in vivo animal model to estimate a dose–response relationship and determine a point of departure (i.e., reference dose [RfD]) associated with an adverse health outcome; and (4) use a statistical measure of “sufficient similarity” to compare the experimental RfD (from Step 3) to the exposure measured in the human population and generate a “similar mixture risk indicator” (SMRI). The objective of this exercise is to generate a proof of concept for the systematic integration of epidemiological and experimental evidence with mixture risk assessment strategies. Using a whole mixture approach, we could find a higher rate of pregnant women under risk (13%) when comparing with the data from more traditional models of additivity (3%), or a compound-by-compound strategy (1.6%).

Details

Database :
OAIster
Notes :
application/pdf, English
Publication Type :
Electronic Resource
Accession number :
edsoai.on1233352620
Document Type :
Electronic Resource
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1111.risa.13323