Evaluation of neural reflex activation as a potential mode of action for respiratory and cardiovascular effects of fine particulate matter.

OBJECTIVES: Mortality from respiratory and cardiovascular health conditions contributes largely to the total mortality that has been associated with exposure to PM2.5 in epidemiology studies. A mode of action (MoA) for these underlying morbidities has not been established, but it has been proposed that some effects of PM2.5 occur through activation of neural reflexes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We critically reviewed the experimental studies of PM2.5 (including ambient PM2.5, diesel exhaust particles, concentrated ambient particles, diesel exhaust, and cigarette smoke) and neural reflex activation, and applied the principles of the International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) MoA/human relevance framework to assess whether they support a biologically plausible and human-relevant MoA by which PM2.5 could contribute to cardiovascular and respiratory causes of death. We also considered whether the evidence from these studies supports a non-threshold MoA that operates at low, human-relevant PM2.5 exposure concentrations. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: We found that the proposed MoA of neural reflex activation is biologically plausible for PM2.5-induced respiratory effects at high exposure levels used in experimental studies, but further studies are needed to fill important data gaps regarding the relevance of this MoA to humans at lower PM2.5 exposure levels. A role for the proposed MoA in PM2.5-induced cardiovascular effects is plausible for some effects but not others. CONCLUSIONS: Further studies are needed to determine whether neural reflex activation is the MoA by which PM2.5 could cause either respiratory or cardiovascular morbidities in humans, particularly at the ambient concentrations associated with total mortality in epidemiology studies.

Nickel in ambient particulate matter and respiratory or cardiovascular outcomes: A critical review.

Exposure to ambient particulate matter (PM) has been associated with respiratory and cardiovascular outcomes, and nickel has been more frequently associated with these outcomes than other metal constituents of ambient PM. Because of this, we evaluated whether the evidence to date supports causal relationships between exposure to nickel in ambient PM and respiratory or cardiovascular outcomes. We critically reviewed 38 studies in human populations published between 2012 and 2022. Although a large variety of respiratory and cardiovascular outcomes were examined, data were sparse for many. As a result, we focused our evaluation on seven respiratory outcomes and three cardiovascular outcomes that were each examined in ≥3 studies. Of these health outcomes, exposure to nickel in ambient PM has been statistically significantly associated with respiratory mortality, respiratory emergency hospital visits, asthma, lung function (i.e., forced expiratory volume in 1 s, forced vital capacity), cardiovascular mortality, and ischemic heart disease mortality. Studies of the health outcomes of focus are subject to multiple methodological limitations, primarily ecological fallacy (short-term exposure studies), exposure measurement error, confounding, model misspecification, and multiple comparisons issue. While some statistically significant associations were reported, they were not strong, precise, or consistent. Statistically significant findings for long-term exposure to nickel in PM were largely reported in studies that could not establish temporality, despite their cohort study design. Statistically significant findings for short-term exposure to nickel in PM were largely reported in studies that could establish temporality, although this cannot inform causal inference at the individual level due to the aggregate level data used. The biological plausibility of the associations is only supported at high concentrations not relevant to ambient exposures. Overall, the literature to date does not provide adequate support for a causal relationship between nickel in ambient PM and respiratory or cardiovascular outcomes.

Evidence evaluated by European Food Safety Authority does not support lowering the temporary tolerable daily intake for bisphenol A.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recently derived a tolerable daily intake (TDI) for bisphenol A (BPA) of 0.2 ng/kg bw/day. There are several issues with EFSA's hazard assessment review process, including that it was based on a limited subset of relevant studies. Multiple public commenters on EFSA's draft evaluation of BPA, including several European regulatory agencies, noted these issues, yet they were not adequately addressed by EFSA in the final evaluation. The TDI for BPA was based on an intermediate immunotoxicity endpoint in mice that has not been observed in other species; there is no evidence that it is a precursor event to any downstream pathological outcome. The TDI is several orders of magnitude lower than estimates of safe doses of BPA established by agencies worldwide, including EFSA's temporary TDI (t-TDI) for BPA established in 2015. Overall, the EFSA hazard assessment review process has led to a conclusion that there are low-dose effects of BPA based on very few, lower quality experimental animal studies. This conclusion is not supported by the totality of the available evidence, which includes multiple high-quality studies not considered by EFSA and indicates that the t-TDI established in 2015 is protective of human health.

WITHDRAWN: Letter to editor: Evidence evaluated by EFSA does not support lowering the temporary tolerable daily intake for bisphenol A.

This article has been withdrawn at the request of the author(s) and/or editor. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal.

Perspectives on recent reviews of aspartame cancer epidemiology.

Aspartame is a dipeptide non-sugar sweetener that was first marketed in the US in carbonated beverages in 1983, before gaining prominence globally. The Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)/World Health Organization (WHO) Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) completed evaluations of aspartame and cancer in July 2023. JECFA reaffirmed the safety of aspartame, stating that epidemiology evidence is "not convincing," and that there are no consistent associations between aspartame and cancer (JECFA/IARC, 2023; JECFA, 2023). JECFA also noted "reverse causality, chance, bias and confounding by socioeconomic or lifestyle factors, or consumption of other dietary components, could not be completely ruled out" in relevant epidemiology studies (JECFA/IARC, 2023). In contrast, IARC stated that there are three "high quality" studies on liver cancer (Riboli, 2023), but that the evidence is limited because "chance, bias or confounding could not be ruled out as an explanation for the positive findings" (JECFA/IARC, 2023). IARC does not provide an explanation as to how these studies can be both high quality and have these weaknesses, most notably potential exposure misclassification, or how inconsistent associations from studies with these weaknesses constitute limited evidence. Further, when IARC concludes an agent has limited or inadequate human evidence (and no sufficient animal or strong mechanistic evidence), it classifies that agent as either Group 2B, a possible human carcinogen, or Group 3, not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity. Ultimately, the interpretations of Group 2B and Group 3 classifications are intended to be similar. However, a Group 2B designation may make it appear to scientists and non-scientists alike that the evidence is pointing in the direction of causality. This can lead to unnecessary confusion with respect to the evidence, as well as a perception of a disagreement within WHO regarding aspartame. This apparent contradiction could have been avoided by assigning the IARC classification most consistent with the conclusion that the human evidence for cancer is inadequate: Group 3.

The role of study quality in aspartame and cancer epidemiology study reviews.

Toews et al. [1] and the World Health Organization (WHO) [2] reviewed observational epidemiology studies of non-sugar sweeteners (NSSs) and various health effects. The former used the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool and the latter used both the ROBINS-I tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to evaluate study quality. Both reviews concluded that there were no associations between NSS or aspartame consumption and cancer (except possibly between saccharin and bladder cancer) but indicated that the certainty of the evidence for all cancer types was "very low." While we agree with this conclusion, the support for the confidence in the evidence generally was not transparently documented, as the results of the study quality assessment were only provided in scores or ratings. An examination of illustrative case studies shows that some important aspects of study quality domains specific for NSSs generally or aspartame specifically (i.e., issues with the exposure and outcome assessments, the consideration of confounding/covariates, and selection bias) may have been overlooked or not given appropriate consideration, while other aspects that were less likely to have a large impact on overall study quality dominated the results in the two assessments. Our review of other studies published after the WHO [2] review further demonstrates this point. While this may not seem important given the overall lack of associations, it impacts the degree to which evidence supports a lack of effects as opposed to not being adequate to evaluate associations. In the future, aspartame and cancer outcome reviews should focus on those study quality domains that are most likely to impact the interpretation of results and discuss them in a transparent, systematic manner. If there is very low certainty in the evidence as a result of low study quality, reviewers should conclude the evidence is inadequate for making a causal determination.

Gas cooking and respiratory outcomes in children: A systematic review.

The most recent meta-analysis of gas cooking and respiratory outcomes in children was conducted by Lin et al. [93] in 2013. Since then, a number of epidemiology studies have been published on this topic. We conducted the first systematic review of this epidemiology literature that includes an in-depth evaluation of study heterogeneity and study quality, neither of which was systematically evaluated in earlier reviews. We reviewed a total of 66 relevant studies, including those in the Lin et al. [93] meta-analysis. Most of the studies are cross-sectional by design, precluding causal inference. Only a few are cohort studies that could establish temporality and they have largely reported null results. There is large variability across studies in terms of study region, age of children, gas cooking exposure definition, and asthma or wheeze outcome definition, precluding clear interpretations of meta-analysis estimates such as those reported in Lin et al. [93]. Further, our systematic study quality evaluation reveals that a large proportion of the studies to date are subject to multiple sources of bias and inaccuracy, primarily due to self-reported gas cooking exposure or respiratory outcomes, insufficient adjustment for key confounders (e.g., environmental tobacco smoke, family history of asthma or allergies, socioeconomic status or home environment), and unestablished temporality. We conclude that the epidemiology literature is limited by high heterogeneity and low study quality and, therefore, it does not provide sufficient evidence regarding causal relationships between gas cooking or indoor NO2 and asthma or wheeze. We caution against over-interpreting the quantitative evidence synthesis estimates from meta-analyses of these studies.

Systematic review of the potential carcinogenicity of bisphenol A in humans.

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a synthetic chemical to which humans are exposed through a variety of environmental sources. We have conducted a comprehensive, systematic review of 29 epidemiology studies and 27 experimental animal studies, published through May 2022, evaluating the potential carcinogenicity of BPA to contribute to the understanding of whether BPA is carcinogenic in humans. We conducted this review according to best practices for systematic reviews and incorporating established frameworks for study quality evaluation and evidence integration. The epidemiology studies have many limitations that increase the risk of biased results, but overall, the studies do not provide clear and consistent evidence for an association between BPA exposure and the development of any type of cancer. The experimental animal studies also do not provide strong and consistent evidence that BPA is associated with the induction of any malignant tumor type. Some of the proposed mechanisms for BPA carcinogenicity are biologically plausible, but the relevance to human exposures is not clear. We conclude that there is inadequate evidence to support a causal relationship between BPA exposure and human carcinogenicity, based on inadequate evidence in humans, as well as evidence from experimental animal studies that suggests a causal relationship is not likely.

Non-asbestiform elongate mineral particles and mesothelioma risk: Human and experimental evidence.

The presentations in this session of the Monticello II conference were aimed at summarizing what is known about asbestiform and non-asbestiform elongate mineral particles (EMPs) and mesothelioma risks based on evidence from experimental and epidemiology studies. Dr. Case discussed case reports of mesothelioma over the last several decades. Dr. Taioli indicated that the epidemiology evidence concerning non-asbestiform EMPs is weak or lacking, and that progress would be limited unless mesothelioma registries are established. One exception discussed is that of taconite miners, who are exposed to grunerite. Drs. Mandel and Odo noted that studies of taconite miners in Minnesota have revealed an excess rate of mesothelioma, but the role of non-asbestiform EMPs in this excess incidence of mesothelioma is unclear. Dr. Becich discussed the National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank (NMVB), a virtual mesothelioma patient registry that includes mesothelioma patients' lifetime work histories, exposure histories, biospecimens, proteogenomic information, and imaging data that can be used in epidemiology research on mesothelioma. Dr. Bernstein indicated that there is a strong consensus that long, highly durable respirable asbestiform EMPs have the potential to cause mesothelioma, but there is continued debate concerning the biodurability required, and the dimensions (both length and diameter), the shape, and the dose associated with mesothelioma risk. Finally, Dr. Nel discussed how experimental studies of High Aspect Ratio Engineered Nanomaterials have clarified dimensional and durability features that impact disease risk, the impact of inflammation and oxidative stress on the epigenetic regulation of tumor suppressor genes, and the generation of immune suppressive effects in the mesothelioma tumor microenvironment. The session ended with a discussion of future research needs.

Systematic review of perchloroethylene and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

We conducted a systematic review of epidemiology studies that evaluated the association between perchloroethylene (PCE) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). This included an independent detailed assessment of a few critical aspects of study quality (i.e., study design, exposure measurement, exposure levels, and potential confounding), and a consideration of other aspects of quality less formally. Of the identified 18 cohort studies of 15 unique cohorts, 17 case-control studies of 14 unique population groups, and 3 ecological studies, none was high quality for all four critical quality elements and each study also had other major methodological study limitations. Reported risk estimates were mostly null, ranged widely from below to above 1, and often had extremely wide confidence intervals (CIs), indicating unstable risk estimates. In addition, there was no consistent evidence of dose-response. Overall, given the low quality of the available epidemiology studies, the evidence does not support an association between PCE exposure and NHL.

Systematic review of the association between long-term exposure to fine particulate matter and mortality.

We used a transparent systematic review framework based on best practices for evaluating study quality and integrating evidence to conduct a review of the available epidemiology studies evaluating associations between long-term exposure to ambient concentrations of PM2.5 and mortality (all-cause and non-accidental) conducted in North America. We found that while there is some consistency across studies for reporting positive associations, these associations are weak and several important methodological issues have led to uncertainties with regard to the evidence from these studies, including potential confounding by measured and unmeasured factors, exposue measurement error, and model misspecification. These uncertainties provide a plausible, alternative explanation to causality for the weakly positive findings across studies. Using a causality framework that incorporates best practices for making causal determinations, we concluded that the evidence for a causal relationship between long-term exposure to ambient PM2.5 concentrations and mortality from these studies is inadequate.

A review and analysis of personal and ambient PM2.5 measurements: Implications for epidemiology studies.

BACKGROUND: In epidemiology studies, ambient measurements of PM2.5 are often used as surrogates for personal exposures. However, it is unclear the degree to which ambient PM2.5 reflects personal exposures. OBJECTIVE: In order to examine potential sources of bias in epidemiology studies, we conducted a review and meta-analysis of studies to determine the extent to which short-term measurements of ambient PM2.5 levels are related to short-term measurements of personal PM2.5 levels. METHODS: We conducted a literature search of studies reporting both personal and ambient measurements of PM2.5 published in the last 10 years (2009-2019) and incorporated studies published prior to 2009 from reviews. RESULTS: Seventy-one studies were identified. Based on 17 studies reporting slopes, a meta-analysis revealed an overall slope of 0.56 µg/m3 (95% CI: [0.39, 0.73]) personal PM2.5 per µg/m3 increase in ambient PM2.5. Slopes for summer months were higher (slope = 0.73, 95% CI: [0.64, 0.81]) than for winter (slope = 0.46, 95% CI: [0.36, 0.57]). Based on 44 studies reporting correlations, we calculated an overall personal-ambient PM2.5 correlation of 0.63 (95% CI: [0.55, 0.71]). Correlations were stronger in studies conducted in Canada (r = 0.86, 95% CI: [0.67, 0.94]) compared to the USA (r = 0.60, 95% CI: [0.49, 0.70]) and China (r = 0.60, 95% CI: [0.46, 0.71]). Correlations also were stronger in urban areas (r = 0.53, 95% CI: [0.43, 0.62]) vs. suburban areas (r = 0.36, 95% CI: [0.21, 0.49]). SIGNIFICANCE: Our results suggest a large degree of variability in the personal-ambient PM2.5 association and the potential for exposure misclassification and measurement error in PM2.5 epidemiology studies.

US EPA's TSCA risk assessment approach: a case study of asbestos in automotive brakes.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) is currently refining its approach for risk assessments conducted under the amended Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), largely based on recommendations from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). We identified several issues with the current TSCA risk assessment approach that were not addressed by NASEM in its recommendations. Here, we demonstrate these issues with a case study of the 'Risk Evaluation for Asbestos, Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos,' which US EPA released in December 2020. In this evaluation, US EPA found that occupational and some consumer uses of automotive brakes and clutches that contain asbestos result in unreasonable risks. These risks were calculated from estimated exposures during brake work and an inhalation unit risk (IUR) developed for chrysotile asbestos. We found that US EPA overestimated risk as a result of unrealistic inputs to both the exposure and toxicity components of the risk equation, and because the Agency did not fully consider relevant epidemiology and toxicity evidence in its systematic review. Our evaluation demonstrates areas in which the TSCA risk assessment approach could be improved to result in risk evaluations that are supported by the available scientific evidence.

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.

Lung physiology and controlled exposure study design.

Controlled human inhalation exposure ( CHIE) studies provide a unique opportunity to conduct formal experiments to examine the human health effects of airborne pollutants. Lung function, easily measured using spirometry, is a common physiological variable often utilized in these studies. By design, CHIE studies only induce mild and reversible acute effects, which may or may not predict adverse effects that may develop under chronic exposure conditions. There is substantial inter- and intra-individual variability in functional capacity and symptoms such as chest tightness and dyspnea, which are complex variables that are affected by individual perception, physiological lung impairment, and other variables (e.g., concomitant health conditions, and level of conditioning/fitness). Thus, the design of the CHIE study and physiological and environmental factors of study participants can affect each CHIE study's results. Researchers can address many of these critical issues in the problem formulation phase of CHIE studies, utilizing existing information on the expected effects of the substance of interest and possible modes of action. Thoughtful design and interpretation of CHIE studies will increase their utility for evaluating and setting environmental health policy.