Benefits and Barriers to Using Epidemiology Data in Environmental Risk Assessment

Abstract

Over the past three decades, a formal risk assessment process has been developed to provide consistent and transparent methods for the assessment of potential human health risks from exposure to environmental chemicals. Given a focus on risk to human health, epidemiological studies that identify associations between exposure to environmental chemicals and adverse health effects in humans have the potential to provide critically important information to this process. For many chemicals, however, available epidemiology studies have been found to have limited utility in informing human health risk assessments. In order to investigate this paradox, we have used several case examples to explore the utility of various types of epidemiological data in informing key elements of the risk assessment process (hazard identification, exposure-response assessment, and exposure assessment). Examples from the epidemiologic literature on environmental chemicals are used to illustrate the issues that arise in using available studies for various types of chemical risk assessments. The case examples illustrate several advantages in using epidemiology data, but also identify a number of barriers to its use, frequently related to limitations in exposure assessment. The examples also highlight ways in which the utility of both toxicology and epidemiology data can be enhanced by considering the data in combination, and integrating the results across study categories. Recent scientific developments offer hope for improving the utility of both types of data, and thus enhancing the reliability of future risk assessment efforts.

Rotenone Use in Fish Management and Parkinson's Disease: Another Look

“…However, the study participants were exposed to many different pesticides, not just rotenone and paraquat, and pesticide exposures were not actually measured; rather, pesticide exposures were based solely on self-reporting methods. Raffaele et al (2011) discussed the problems associated with using epidemiological data in environmental risk assessments, specifically citing as examples studies on pesticide exposure contributing to the increased risk of PD. They found inconsistent findings between studies, generic categorization of pesticide exposure, and the use of dichotomous exposure categories (e.g., "ever" versus "never").…”

Allowable limits for toxic leachables: practical use of ISO 10993-17 standard * *The recommendations offered in this chapter should not be construed as guidance from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The mention of commercial products, their sources or their use in connection with material reported herein is not to be construed as either an actual or implied endorsement of such products by the Department of Health and Human Services.

“…(2011) and Raffaele et al . In fact, the standard notes that data from human studies are preferred over those from animal studies when setting a TI value.…”

Food-Borne Chemical Carcinogens and the Evidence for Human Cancer Risk

“…Two types of carcinogenicity data are used in the assessment of risk: human epidemiologic data and tumor data obtained in testing in rodent models [ 58 ]. The former is considered more relevant for a variety of reasons [ 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 ], although such data are often limited in human exposure information and can be poorly controlled [ 63 ].…”