Triangulation of epidemiological evidence and risk of bias evaluation: A proposed framework and applied example using formaldehyde exposure and risk of myeloid leukemias.

Evidence triangulation may help identify the impact of study design elements on study findings and to tease out biased results when evaluating potential causal relationships; however, methods for triangulating epidemiologic evidence are evolving and have not been standardized. Building upon key principles of epidemiologic evidence triangulation and risk of bias assessment, and responding to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) call for applied triangulation examples, the objective of this manuscript is to propose a triangulation framework and to apply it as an illustrative example to epidemiologic studies examining the possible relationship between occupational formaldehyde exposure and risk of myeloid leukemias (ML) including acute (AML) and chronic (CML) types. A nine-component triangulation framework for epidemiological evidence was developed incorporating study quality and ROB guidance from various federal health agencies (i.e., US EPA TSCA and NTP OHAT). Several components of the triangulation framework also drew from widely used epidemiological analytic tools such as stratified meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis. Regarding the applied example, fourteen studies were identified and assessed using the following primary study quality domains to explore potential key sources of bias: 1) study design and analysis; 2) study participation; 3) exposure assessment; 4) outcome assessment; and 5) potential confounding. Across studies, methodological limitations possibly contributing to biased results were observed within most domains. Interestingly, results from one study - often providing the largest and least-precise relative risk estimates, likely reflecting study biases, deviated from most primary study findings indicating no such associations. Triangulation of epidemiological evidence appears to be helpful in exploring inconsistent results for the identification of study results possibly reflecting various biases. Nonetheless, triangulation methodologies require additional development and application to real-world examples to enhance objectivity and reproducibility.

Systematic review of the association between talc and female reproductive tract cancers.

Talc is a hydrous magnesium sheet silicate used in cosmetic powders, ceramics, paints, rubber, and many other products. We conducted a systematic review of the potential carcinogenicity of genitally applied talc in humans. Our systematic review methods adhere to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and incorporated aspects from the US Institute of Medicine (IOM, now the National Academy of Medicine) and several US EPA frameworks for systematic reviews, evaluating and integrating the epidemiological, animal, and mechanistic literature on talc and cancer. We conducted a comprehensive literature search. Detailed data abstraction and study quality evaluation, adapting the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) framework, were central to our analysis. The literature search and selection process identified 40 primary studies that assessed exposure to talc and female reproductive cancer risks in humans (n = 36) and animals (n = 4). The results of our evaluation emphasize the importance of considering biological plausibility and study quality in systematic review. Integrating all streams of evidence according to the IOM framework yielded classifications of suggestive evidence of no association between perineal application of talcum powders and risk of ovarian cancer at human-relevant exposure levels. We also concluded that there is suggestive evidence of no association between genital talc application and endometrial cancer, and insufficient evidence to determine whether a causal association exists between genital talc application and cervical cancer based on a smaller but largely null body of literature.

Systematic review of the scientific evidence of the pulmonary carcinogenicity of talc.

We conducted a systematic review to assess the potential pulmonary carcinogenicity of inhaled talc in humans. Our systematic review methods adhere to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and incorporated aspects from the US Institute of Medicine (IOM) and several United States (US) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) frameworks for systematic reviews. A comprehensive literature search was conducted. Detailed data abstraction and study quality evaluation, adapting the US Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) framework, were central to our analysis. The literature search and selection process identified 23 primary studies that assessed exposure to talc and pulmonary cancer risks in humans (n = 19) and animals (n = 3). Integrating all streams of evidence according to the IOM framework yielded classifications of suggestive evidence of no association between inhaled talc and lung cancer and pleural mesothelioma at human-relevant exposure levels.