A tool to assess risk of bias in non-randomized follow-up studies of exposure effects (ROBINS-E).

BACKGROUND: Observational epidemiologic studies provide critical data for the evaluation of the potential effects of environmental, occupational and behavioural exposures on human health. Systematic reviews of these studies play a key role in informing policy and practice. Systematic reviews should incorporate assessments of the risk of bias in results of the included studies. OBJECTIVE: To develop a new tool, Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Exposures (ROBINS-E) to assess risk of bias in estimates from cohort studies of the causal effect of an exposure on an outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: ROBINS-E was developed by a large group of researchers from diverse research and public health disciplines through a series of working groups, in-person meetings and pilot testing phases. The tool aims to assess the risk of bias in a specific result (exposure effect estimate) from an individual observational study that examines the effect of an exposure on an outcome. A series of preliminary considerations informs the core ROBINS-E assessment, including details of the result being assessed and the causal effect being estimated. The assessment addresses bias within seven domains, through a series of 'signalling questions'. Domain-level judgements about risk of bias are derived from the answers to these questions, then combined to produce an overall risk of bias judgement for the result, together with judgements about the direction of bias. CONCLUSION: ROBINS-E provides a standardized framework for examining potential biases in results from cohort studies. Future work will produce variants of the tool for other epidemiologic study designs (e.g. case-control studies). We believe that ROBINS-E represents an important development in the integration of exposure assessment, evidence synthesis and causal inference.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in breast milk and infant formula: A global issue.

BACKGROUND: Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are transferred from mother to infants through breastfeeding, a time when children may be particularly vulnerable to PFAS-mediated adverse health effects. Infants can also be exposed to PFAS from infant formula consumption. Our recent literature-based scoping of breast milk levels reported that four PFAS often exceeded the United States Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) children's drinking water screening levels in both the general population and highly impacted communities in the U.S. and Canada. This work presents a comparison of global breast milk and infant formula PFAS measurements with the only reported health-based drinking water screening values specific to children. METHODS: We focused on four PFAS for which ATSDR has developed children's drinking water screening values: PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid), PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonic acid), PFHxS (perfluorohexanesulfonic acid), and PFNA (perfluorononanoic acid). Published literature on PFAS levels in breast milk and infant formula were identified via PubMed searches. Data were compared to children's drinking water screening values. DISCUSSION: Breast milk concentrations of PFOA and PFOS often exceed children's drinking water screening values, regardless of geographic location. The limited information on infant formula suggests its use does not necessarily result in lower PFAS exposures, especially for formulas reconstituted with drinking water containing PFAS. Unfortunately, individuals generally cannot know whether their infant's exposures exceed children's drinking water screening values. Thus, it is essential that pregnant and lactating women and others, especially those having lived in PFAS-contaminated communities, have data required to make informed decisions on infant nutrition. An international monitoring effort and access to affordable testing are needed for breast milk, drinking water and infant formula to fully understand infant PFAS exposures. Currently, our understanding of demonstrable methods for reducing exposures to emerging PFAS is limited, making this research and the communications surrounding it even more important.

Interpreting biomonitoring data: Introducing the international human biomonitoring (i-HBM) working group's health-based guidance value (HB2GV) dashboard.

Human biomonitoring (HBM) data measured in specific contexts or populations provide information for comparing population exposures. There are numerous health-based biomonitoring guidance values, but to locate these values, interested parties need to seek them out individually from publications, governmental reports, websites and other sources. Until now, there has been no central, international repository for this information. Thus, a tool is needed to help researchers, public health professionals, risk assessors, and regulatory decision makers to quickly locate relevant values on numerous environmental chemicals. A free, on-line repository for international health-based guidance values to facilitate the interpretation of HBM data is now available. The repository is referred to as the "Human Biomonitoring Health-Based Guidance Value (HB2GV) Dashboard". The Dashboard represents the efforts of the International Human Biomonitoring Working Group (i-HBM), affiliated with the International Society of Exposure Science. The i-HBM's mission is to promote the use of population-level HBM data to inform public health decision-making by developing harmonized resources to facilitate the interpretation of HBM data in a health-based context. This paper describes the methods used to compile the human biomonitoring health-based guidance values, how the values can be accessed and used, and caveats with using the Dashboard for interpreting HBM data. To our knowledge, the HB2GV Dashboard is the first open-access, curated database of HBM guidance values developed for use in interpreting HBM data. This new resource can assist global HBM data users such as risk assessors, risk managers and biomonitoring programs with a readily available compilation of guidance values.

A Novel Application of Risk-Risk Tradeoffs in Occupational Health: Nurses' Occupational Asthma and Infection Risk Perceptions Related to Cleaning and Disinfection during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Nurses face the risk of new onset occupational asthma (OA) due to exposures to cleaning and disinfection (C&D) agents used to prevent infections in healthcare facilities. The objective of this study was to measure nurses' preferences when presented with simultaneous OA and respiratory viral infection (e.g., COVID-19) risks related to increased/decreased C&D activities. METHODS: Nurses working in healthcare for ≥1 year and without physician-diagnosed asthma were recruited for an online anonymous survey, including four risk-risk tradeoff scenarios between OA and respiratory infection with subsequent recovery (Infect and Recovery) or subsequent death (Infect and Death). Nurses were presented with baseline risks at hypothetical "Hospital 1", and were asked to choose Hospital 2 (increased OA risk to maintain infection risk), Hospital 3 (increased infection risk to maintain OA risk), or indicate that they were equally happy. RESULTS: Over 70% of nurses were willing to increase infection risk to maintain baseline OA risk if they were confident they would recover from the infection. However, even when the risk of infection leading to death was much lower than OA, most nurses were not willing to accept a larger (but still small) risk of death to avoid doubling their OA risk. Age, work experience, and ever having contracted or knowing anyone who has contracted a respiratory viral infection at work influenced choices. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate the novel application of a risk-risk tradeoff framework to address an occupational health issue. However, more data are needed to test the generalizability of the risk preferences found in this specific risk-risk tradeoff context.

Research on COVID-19 and air pollution: A path towards advancing exposure science.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an extraordinary incidence of morbidity and mortality, with almost 6 million deaths worldwide at the time of this writing (https://covid19.who.int/). There has been a pressing need for research that would shed light on factors - especially modifiable factors - that could reduce risks to human health. At least several hundred studies addressing the complex relationships among transmission of SARS-CoV-2, air pollution, and human health have been published. However, these investigations are limited by available and consistent data. The project goal was to seek input into opportunities to improve and fund exposure research on the confluence of air pollution and infectious agents such as SARS-CoV-2. Thirty-two scientists with expertise in exposure science, epidemiology, risk assessment, infectious diseases, and/or air pollution responded to the outreach for information. Most of the respondents expressed value in developing a set of common definitions regarding the extent and type of public health lockdown. Traffic and smoking ranked high as important sources of air pollution warranting source-specific research (in contrast with assessing overall ambient level exposures). Numerous important socioeconomic factors were also identified. Participants offered a wide array of inputs on what they considered to be essential studies to improve our understanding of exposures. These ranged from detailed mechanistic studies to improved air quality monitoring studies and prospective cohort studies. Overall, many respondents indicated that these issues require more research and better study design. As an exercise to solicit opinions, important concepts were brought forth that provide opportunities for scientific collaboration and for consideration for funding prioritization. Further conversations on these concepts are needed to advance our thinking on how to design research that moves us past the documented limitations in the current body of research and prepares us for the next pandemic.

Current Breast Milk PFAS Levels in the United States and Canada: After All This Time, Why Don't We Know More?

BACKGROUND: Despite 20 y of biomonitoring studies of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in both serum and urine, we have an extremely limited understanding of PFAS concentrations in breast milk of women from the United States and Canada. The lack of robust information on PFAS concentrations in breast milk and implications for breastfed infants and their families were brought to the forefront by communities impacted by PFAS contamination. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this work are to: a) document published PFAS breast milk concentrations in the United States and Canada; b) estimate breast milk PFAS levels from maternal serum concentrations in national surveys and communities impacted by PFAS; and c) compare measured/estimated milk PFAS concentrations to screening values. METHODS: We used three studies reporting breast milk concentrations in the United States and Canada We also estimated breast milk PFAS concentrations by multiplying publicly available serum concentrations by milk:serum partitioning ratios for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA). Measured and estimated breast milk concentrations were compared to children's drinking water screening values. DISCUSSION: Geometric means of estimated breast milk concentrations ranged over approximately two orders of magnitude for the different surveys/communities. All geometric mean and mean estimated and measured breast milk PFOA and PFOS concentrations exceeded drinking water screening values for children, sometimes by more than two orders of magnitude. For PFHxS and PFNA, all measured breast milk levels were below the drinking water screening values for children; the geometric mean estimated breast milk concentrations were close to-or exceeded-the children's drinking water screening values for certain communities. Exceeding a children's drinking water screening value does not indicate that adverse health effects will occur and should not be interpreted as a reason to not breastfeed; it indicates that the situation should be further evaluated. It is past time to have a better understanding of environmental chemical transfer to-and concentrations in-an exceptional source of infant nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP10359.

Elements to increase translation in pyrethroid epidemiology research: A review.

Pyrethroid insecticides have been the subject of numerous epidemiology studies in the past two decades. We examined the pyrethroids epidemiology literature published between 2016 and 2021. Our objective with this exercise was to inform interested readers regarding information on methodological elements that strengthen a study's use for translation (i.e., use in risk assessment) and to describe aspects of future research methods that could improve utility for decision-making. We focused on the following elements: (i) study design that provided evidence that pyrethroid exposure preceded the outcome, (ii) evidence that the method used for exposure characterization was reliable and sufficiently accurate for the intended purpose, and (iii) use of a robust approach for outcome ascertainment. For each of the 74 studies identified via the literature search, we categorized the methodological elements as Acceptable or Supplemental. A study with three Acceptable elements was considered Relevant for risk assessment purposes. Based on our evaluative approach, 18 (24%) of the 74 publications were considered to be Relevant. These publications were categorized as Acceptable for all three elements assessed: confirmed exposure (N = 24), confirmed outcome (N = 64), exposure preceded the outcome (N = 44). Three of these studies were birth cohorts. There were 15 Relevant publications of adults which included 10 Agricultural Health Study cohort publications of self-reported permethrin. Overall, the majority of the reviewed studies used methods that did not permit a determination that pyrethroid exposure preceded the outcome, and/or did not utilize robust methods for exposure assessment and outcome ascertainment. There is an opportunity for investigators and research sponsors to build on the studies reviewed here and to incorporate more translational approaches to studying exposure/outcome associations related to pesticides and other chemicals.

Using the Matrix to bridge the epidemiology/risk assessment gap: a case study of 2,4-D.

BACKGROUND: The Matrix is designed to facilitate discussions between practitioners of risk assessment and epidemiology and, in so doing, to enhance the utility of epidemiology research for public health decision-making. The Matrix is comprised of nine fundamental "asks" of epidemiology studies, focusing on the types of information valuable to the risk assessment process. OBJECTIVE: A 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) case study highlights the extent to which existing epidemiology literature includes information generally needed for risk assessments and proffers suggestions that would assist in bridging the epidemiology/risk assessment gap. METHODS: Thirty-one publications identified in the US Environmental Protection Agency 2,4-D epidemiology review were assessed. These studies focused on associations between 2,4-D exposure and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), respiratory effects, and birth outcomes. RESULTS: Many of the papers met one or more specific elements of the Matrix. However, from this case study, it is clear that some aspects of risk assessment, such as evaluating source-to-intake pathways, are generally not considered in epidemiology research. Others are incorporated, but infrequently (e.g. dose-response information, harmonization of exposure categories). We indicated where additional analyses or modifications to future study design could serve to improve the translation. DISCUSSION: Interaction with risk assessors during the study design phase and using the Matrix "asks" to guide the conversations could shape research and provide the basis for requests for funds to support these additional activities. The use of the Matrix as a foundation for communication and education across disciplines could produce more impactful and consequential epidemiology research for robust risk assessments and decision-making.

Does ozone inhalation cause adverse metabolic effects in humans? A systematic review.

We utilized a practical, transparent approach for systematically reviewing a chemical-specific evidence base. This approach was used for a case study of ozone inhalation exposure and adverse metabolic effects (overweight/obesity, Type 1 diabetes [T1D], Type 2 diabetes [T2D], and metabolic syndrome). We followed the basic principles of systematic review. Studies were defined as "Suitable" or "Supplemental." The evidence for Suitable studies was characterized as strong or weak. An overall causality judgment for each outcome was then determined as either causal, suggestive, insufficient, or not likely. Fifteen epidemiologic and 33 toxicologic studies were Suitable for evidence synthesis. The strength of the human evidence was weak for all outcomes. The toxicologic evidence was weak for all outcomes except two: body weight, and impaired glucose tolerance/homeostasis and fasting/baseline hyperglycemia. The combined epidemiologic and toxicologic evidence was categorized as weak for overweight/obesity, T1D, and metabolic syndrome,. The association between ozone exposure and T2D was determined to be insufficient or suggestive. The streamlined approach described in this paper is transparent and focuses on key elements. As systematic review guidelines are becoming increasingly complex, it is worth exploring the extent to which related health outcomes should be combined or kept distinct, and the merits of focusing on critical elements to select studies suitable for causal inference. We recommend that systematic review results be used to target discussions around specific research needs for advancing causal determinations.

How Many Urine Samples Are Needed to Accurately Assess Exposure to Non-Persistent Chemicals? The Biomarker Reliability Assessment Tool (BRAT) for Scientists, Research Sponsors, and Risk Managers.

In epidemiologic and exposure research, biomonitoring is often used as the basis for assessing human exposure to environmental chemicals. Studies frequently rely on a single urinary measurement per participant to assess exposure to non-persistent chemicals. However, there is a growing consensus that single urine samples may be insufficient for adequately estimating exposure. The question then arises: how many samples would be needed for optimal characterization of exposure? To help researchers answer this question, we developed a tool called the Biomarker Reliability Assessment Tool (BRAT). The BRAT is based on pharmacokinetic modeling simulations, is freely available, and is designed to help researchers determine the approximate number of urine samples needed to optimize exposure assessment. The BRAT performs Monte Carlo simulations of exposure to estimate internal levels and resulting urinary concentrations in individuals from a population based on user-specified inputs (e.g., biological half-life, within- and between-person variability in exposure). The BRAT evaluates-through linear regression and quantile classification-the precision/accuracy of the estimation of internal levels depending on the number of urine samples. This tool should guide researchers towards more robust biomonitoring and improved exposure classification in epidemiologic and exposure research, which should in turn improve the translation of that research into decision-making.

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[...].

Methodological evaluation of human research on asthmagenicity and occupational cleaning: a case study of quaternary ammonium compounds ("quats").

In this paper, we review methodological approaches used in studies that evaluated the association between occupational exposure to quaternary ammonium compounds (quats) and occupational asthma. This association is of interest because quats are a common active ingredient of disinfectants and have been linked to work-related asthma in some circumstances. However, any evidence-based assessment of an exposure-outcome association needs to consider both strengths and limitations of the literature. We focus on publications cited by various US and international organizations. Eighteen investigations included in the review fall into two broad categories: case reports and challenge studies of individual patients and population studies that examined the association between quats and asthma occurrence in groups of subjects. We evaluated these studies guided by questions that address whether: exposure data on specific quat(s) and other agents that may cause asthma were included, new asthma cases were differentiated from asthma exacerbation, and information on respiratory sensitivity versus irritation was given. We also assessed consistency across studies. Studies of individual patients, particularly those that provided detailed information on challenge test results, document cases of asthma induced by exposure to quats. By contrast, studies of occupational groups with the highest potential for quats exposure (e.g., cleaners and farmers) do not consistently report increased incidence of asthma due specifically to quats. The unresolved methodological issues include: poor understanding of exposure pathways considering that quats are non-volatile, lack of quantitative data allowing for identification of an asthmagenicity threshold, insufficient information on whether quats are sensitizers or act via dose-dependent irritation or some other mechanism, and inability to quantify risk of new-onset asthma attributable to quats. Another important area of uncertainty is the lack of information on the specific quats being used. There is also a lack of data capable of distinguishing the effects of quats from those of other chemical and biological workplace exposures. The current state-of-the-science does not allow a proper assessment of the potential link between quats and occupational asthma.

Factors affecting interpretation of national biomonitoring data from multiple countries: BPA as a case study.

INTRODUCTION: The use of biomonitoring data as an indicator of national levels of human exposure to environmental chemicals has grown in importance and prevalence. Nationally representative urinary bisphenol A (BPA) data are now available for Canada, the United States and Korea. Here we address the following questions: Are urinary BPA data from these countries comparable? What can be discerned regarding geographic and/or temporal similarities or differences? Are there generalizable lessons to be learned regarding comparison of biomonitoring results from different countries? METHODS: We examined underlying methods and resultant urinary BPA data from national surveys of three countries: Canada (Canadian Health Measures Survey, CHMS, 2009-2015); United States (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, NHANES, 2009-2014); and Korea (Korean National Environmental Health Survey, KoNEHS, 2009-2014). We estimated BPA daily intakes on both a volume- and creatinine-adjusted basis. RESULTS: The three countries use similar methods for analyzing urine samples for BPA and participate in external proficiency testing with acceptable results. Field blanks are only used in the CHMS program. There were program-specific differences in fasting times of participants. Median urinary BPA levels in Canada remained relatively constant over the three cycles (1.1-1.2 ng/ml), while US levels decreased (from 1.9 to 1.3 ng/ml) and Korean levels increased (from 0.7 to 1.1 ng/ml) over similar time periods. The most recent survey year data indicate that levels do not differ substantially across countries. Canadian urinary BPA levels have been stable; the subtle, non-significant decrease in intakes may be due to higher body weight in the more recent Canadian surveys. In contrast, the decrease in intakes in the US appears to be due to decreases in urinary BPA as body weights in the US have been stable. Estimated 95th percentile intakes are over an order of magnitude below current health-based guidance values. DISCUSSION: Our assessment of urinary BPA data from Canada, the US and Korea indicates that methodological differences, methods for dilution adjustment, and population characteristics should be carefully considered when interpreting biomonitoring data. Despite the plethora of publications describing issues with use of creatinine levels for urinary dilution adjustment, there have been no major methodological advances that would assist in interpreting urinary chemical data. A combination of biomonitoring and traditional exposure assessment approaches may be needed to fully assess human exposures to BPA and other chemicals. CONCLUSIONS: National biomonitoring surveys provide important information on population levels of chemicals such as BPA and can assist in understanding temporal and geographic similarities, differences, and trends. However, caution must be exercised when using these data to draw anything but broad conclusions, due to both intercountry methodological differences and factors affecting urinary chemical levels that are still poorly understood. While the issues raised in this paper do not appear to be a major concern specifically for the national-scale monitoring of BPA described here, they must be considered when comparing data for other chemicals measured as part of both national and smaller-scale biomonitoring-based research as well as for BPA data from other studies.

Biomonitoring and Nonpersistent Chemicals-Understanding and Addressing Variability and Exposure Misclassification.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We offer here a review of intraindividual variability in urinary biomarkers for assessing exposure to nonpersistent chemicals. We provide thoughts on how to better evaluate exposure to nonpersistent chemicals. RECENT FINDINGS: We summarized reported values of intraclass correlation coefficients and found that most values fall into categories that indicate only poor to good reproducibility. Even within the "good" classification, a large percentage of study participants is likely to be misclassified as to their exposure. There is sufficient information to support the statement that studies using only one spot measurement of a nonpersistent chemical will be unreliable. It is unequivocal that multiple samples have to be collected over a period of toxicological relevance and with consideration of exposure patterns. Sponsors of research and researchers themselves should be vocal about ensuring that sufficient resources are made available to properly characterize exposures when studying nonpersistent chemicals. Otherwise, we will continue to see an ever-growing body of literature yielding inconsistent and/or uninterpretable results.

ExpoQual: Evaluating measured and modeled human exposure data.

Recent rapid technological advances are producing exposure data sets for which there are no available data quality assessment tools. At the same time, regulatory agencies are moving in the direction of data quality assessment for environmental risk assessment and decision-making. A transparent and systematic approach to evaluating exposure data will aid in those efforts. Any approach to assessing data quality must consider the level of quality needed for the ultimate use of the data. While various fields have developed approaches to assess data quality, there is as yet no general, user-friendly approach to assess both measured and modeled data in the context of a fit-for-purpose risk assessment. Here we describe ExpoQual, an instrument developed for this purpose which applies recognized parameters and exposure data quality elements from existing approaches for assessing exposure data quality. Broad data streams such as quantitative measured and modeled human exposure data as well as newer and developing approaches can be evaluated. The key strength of ExpoQual is that it facilitates a structured, reproducible and transparent approach to exposure data quality evaluation and provides for an explicit fit-for-purpose determination. ExpoQual was designed to minimize subjectivity and to include transparency in aspects based on professional judgment. ExpoQual is freely available on-line for testing and user feedback (exposurequality.com).

Environmental Chemicals in Breast Milk and Formula: Exposure and Risk Assessment Implications.

BACKGROUND: Human health risk assessment methods have advanced in recent years to more accurately estimate risks associated with exposure during childhood. However, predicting risks related to infant exposures to environmental chemicals in breast milk and formula remains challenging. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to compile available information on infant exposures to environmental chemicals in breast milk and formula, describe methods to characterize infant exposure and potential for health risk in the context of a risk assessment, and identify research needed to improve risk analyses based on this type of exposure and health risk information. METHODS: We reviewed recent literature on levels of environmental chemicals in breast milk and formula, with a focus on data from the United States. We then selected three example publications that quantified infant exposure using breast milk or formula chemical concentrations and estimated breast milk or formula intake. The potential for health risk from these dietary exposures was then characterized by comparison with available health risk benchmarks. We identified areas of this approach in need of improvement to better characterize the potential for infant health risk from this critical exposure pathway. DISCUSSION: Measurements of chemicals in breast milk and formula are integral to the evaluation of risk from early life dietary exposures to environmental chemicals. Risk assessments may also be informed by research investigating the impact of chemical exposure on developmental processes known to be active, and subject to disruption, during infancy, and by analysis of exposure-response data specific to the infant life stage. Critical data gaps exist in all of these areas. CONCLUSIONS: Better-designed studies are needed to characterize infant exposures to environmental chemicals in breast milk and infant formula as well as to improve risk assessments of chemicals found in both foods. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1953.