Critical and systematic evaluation of data for estimating human exposures to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) - quality and generalizability.

The herbicide 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) has been commercially available since the 1940's. Despite decades of data on 2,4-D in food, air, soil, and water, as well as in humans, the quality the quality of these data has not been comprehensively evaluated. Using selected elements of the Biomonitoring, Environmental Epidemiology, and Short-lived Chemicals (BEES-C) instrument (temporal variability, avoidance of sample contamination, analyte stability, and urinary methods of matrix adjustment), the quality of 156 publications of environmental- and biomonitoring-based 2,4-D data was examined. Few publications documented steps were taken to avoid sample contamination. Similarly, most studies did not demonstrate the stability of the analyte from sample collection to analysis. Less than half of the biomonitoring publications reported both creatinine-adjusted and unadjusted urine concentrations. The scope and detail of data needed to assess temporal variability and sources of 2,4-D varied widely across the reviewed studies. Exposures to short-lived chemicals such as 2,4-D are impacted by numerous and changing external factors including application practices and formulations. At a minimum, greater transparency in reporting of quality control measures is needed. Perhaps the greatest challenge for the exposure community is the ability to reach consensus on how to address problems specific to short-lived chemical exposures in observational epidemiology investigations. More extensive conversations are needed to advance our understanding of human exposures and enable interpretation of these data to catch up to analytical capabilities. The problems defined in this review remain exquisitely difficult to address for chemicals like 2,4-D, with short and variable environmental and physiological half-lives and with exposures impacted by numerous and changing external factors.

Cancer clusters in the USA: what do the last twenty years of state and federal investigations tell us?

BACKGROUND: Cancer clusters garner considerable public and legislative attention, and there is often an expectation that cluster investigations in a community will reveal a causal link to an environmental exposure. At a 1989 national conference on disease clusters, it was reported that cluster studies conducted in the 1970s and 1980s rarely, if ever, produced important findings. We seek to answer the question: Have cancer cluster investigations conducted by US health agencies in the past 20 years improved our understanding of cancer etiology, or informed cancer prevention and control? METHODS: We reviewed publicly available cancer cluster investigation reports since 1990, obtained from literature searches and by canvassing all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Investigations were categorized with respect to cancer type(s), hypothesized exposure, whether perceived clusters were confirmed (e.g. by elevated incidence), and conclusions about a link between cancer(s) of concern and hypothesized environmental exposure(s). RESULTS: We reviewed 428 investigations evaluating 567 cancers of concern. An increase in incidence was confirmed for 72 (13%) cancer categories (including the category "all sites"). Three of those were linked (with variable degree of certainty) to hypothesized exposures, but only one investigation revealed a clear cause. CONCLUSIONS: It is fair to state that extensive efforts to find causes of community cancer clusters have not been successful. There are fundamental shortcomings to our current methods of investigating community cancer clusters. We recommend a multidisciplinary national dialogue on creative, innovative approaches to understanding when and why cancer and other chronic diseases cluster in space and time.

Translation of Exposure and Epidemiology for Risk Assessment: A Shifting Paradigm.

Risk assessment is a well-established process used for various types of public health decision-making, such as setting chemical site clean-up levels, developing limits on exposures to chemicals in soil, water, air and food, and determining occupational exposure limits[...].