Comparable measures of cognitive function in human infants and laboratory animals to identify environmental health risks to children.

Sharbaugh, Carolyn; Viet, Susan Marie; Fraser, Alexa; McMaster, S.B.

doi:10.1289/ehp.6205

Cited by 19 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The rodent tests for neurobehavioral assessment used in the animal studies were designed to measure similar functions as neurobehavioral tests conducted for humans but they cannot match the complexity of human behavior (Ulbrich and Palmer, 1996). The test batteries include tests of locomotor activity and crude assessments of learning, sensory, and motor integration, and these are typically parallel tests, in that they are conducted in a different manner in humans but it is believed that the same functions are being measured (Sharbaugh et al, 2003). Ideally, homologous tests, which follow the same procedure in both animals and humans, would provide a more accurate measure of the same cognitive function, but such tests are not available (Sharbaugh et al, 2003).…”

Section: Evaluation Of Hypotheses For All Lines Of Evidence Togethermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The test batteries include tests of locomotor activity and crude assessments of learning, sensory, and motor integration, and these are typically parallel tests, in that they are conducted in a different manner in humans but it is believed that the same functions are being measured (Sharbaugh et al, 2003). Ideally, homologous tests, which follow the same procedure in both animals and humans, would provide a more accurate measure of the same cognitive function, but such tests are not available (Sharbaugh et al, 2003). For example, although a common endpoint for children is a score on a standardized test of intelligence or IQ, there are no standardized intelligence tests for animals that can identify subtle cognitive dysfunction (Rice, 2005;Winneke, 1992).…”

Section: Evaluation Of Hypotheses For All Lines Of Evidence Togethermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence evaluation of the neurodevelopmental effects of chlorpyrifos

Prueitt

Goodman

Bailey

et al. 2011

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used a hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence (HBWoE) approach to analyze the evidence regarding the hypothesis that chlorpyrifos can cause neurodevelopmental effects below the threshold for inhibition of acetylcholinesterase activity in the nervous system, which is an established mode of action for chlorpyrifos neurotoxicity. The epidemiology data do not consistently demonstrate associations between chlorpyrifos exposure and neurodevelopmental toxicity, and the animal toxicity data do not provide clear evidence that neurodevelopmental effects occur at doses below the threshold for acetylcholinesterase inhibition. The alternative mechanisms proposed to underlie potential neurodevelopmental effects in humans have been observed in the absence of acetylcholinesterase inhibition in a few in vitro studies but not in the developing brain in vivo. We provide perspective on the HBWoE approach compared with frameworks developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the European Center for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals. We suggest that our HBWoE approach offers advantages over these frameworks in providing a better perspective on how to integrate all of the relevant data and how to use each line of evidence to inform the integration of other kinds of data or compare alternative hypotheses. Based on an HBWoE analysis, we conclude that a causal association between chlorpyrifos exposure and neurodevelopmental effects in the absence of acetylcholinesterase inhibition in the brain is not plausible in humans, and the few positive associations observed in epidemiology studies are most likely attributable to alternative explanations.

show abstract

Section: Evaluation Of Hypotheses For All Lines Of Evidence Togethermentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evaluation Of Hypotheses For All Lines Of Evidence Togethermentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence evaluation of the neurodevelopmental effects of chlorpyrifos

Prueitt

Goodman

Bailey

et al. 2011

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As in other diseases, properly conducted animal models may be useful in the search for preventive measures or a cure for AD. The development of animal models with cognitive profiles and pathological changes similar to those seen in humans with AD is the goal of translational research (Sharbaugh et al, 2003). Such models could be used in preclinical studies assessing the potential of novel therapeutics.…”

Section: Animal Models Of Admentioning

confidence: 99%

Utility of animal models of Alzheimer's disease in food bioactive research

Lange¹

2021

Journal of Food Bioactives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by globally impaired cognition. AD research in animals has shown a substantial deficit in translational relevance. The most extensively used transgenic mouse models overexpress human genes associated with rare familial early-onset AD, which results in the formation of amyloid plaques. However, the most common form of AD (late-onset sporadic AD) is a multifactorial disorder involving different cytotoxic factors, including neurofibrillary pathology. Transgenic mice studies have been valuable in elucidating pathogenetic mechanisms that may be relevant to human AD. However, their utility in the development of novel treatment strategies and as preclinical testbeds of new drugs has been unsatisfactory. Animal models have so far failed to demonstrate predictive value in regard to novel therapies of AD, including the use of bioactive food components. While many therapeutic approaches assessed in animals have shown promising results, attempts to translate these findings to people with AD have been disappointing. Food scientists should be aware that the available animal models appear to be unable to predict clinical success in humans. Therefore, food bioactive research should focus on human-centric preventive approaches to AD in clinically meaningful settings rather than on highly questionable preclinical research in animals.

show abstract

“…Planning for this large study began in mid-2000 with the initiation of a number of methods development studies, particularly the development of less burdensome and less costly exposure assessment methods ( U.S. EPA 2004a ). Other efforts have included laboratory studies on noninvasive procedures for analysis of biomarkers of exposures and outcomes ( Rockett et al 2002 ), development of comparable measures that could be administered in children and laboratory animal models enabling further exploration of exposure–outcome links in animal studies ( Sharbaugh et al 2003 ), and field studies using focus groups to explore recruitment and retention issues. A number of reviews and white papers have been developed, including an evaluation of advanced technology for capturing data, a review of the leading hypotheses of the effects of environmental factors on children’s health outcomes, and a review of the leading sampling strategies for consideration in the study.…”

Section: The National Children’s Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons Learned for the National Children’s Study from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Centers for Children’s Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research

Kimmel

Collman

Fields

et al. 2005

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This mini-monograph was developed to highlight the experiences of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Centers for Children’s Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research, focusing particularly on several areas of interest for the National Children’s Study. These include general methodologic issues for conducting longitudinal birth cohort studies and community-based participatory research and for measuring air pollution exposures, pesticide exposures, asthma, and neuro-behavioral toxicity. Rather than a detailed description of the studies in each of the centers, this series of articles is intended to provide information on the practicalities of conducting such intensive studies and the lessons learned. This explication of lessons learned provides an outstanding opportunity for the planners of the National Children’s Study to draw on past experiences that provide information on what has and has not worked when studying diverse multiracial and multi-ethnic groups of children with unique urban and rural exposures. The Children’s Centers have addressed and overcome many hurdles in their efforts to understand the link between environmental exposures and health outcomes as well as interactions between exposures and a variety of social and cultural factors. Some of the major lessons learned include the critical importance of long-term studies for assessing the full range of developmental consequences of environmental exposures, recognition of the unique challenges presented at different life stages for both outcome and exposure measurement, and the importance of ethical issues that must be dealt with in a changing medical and legal environment. It is hoped that these articles will be of value to others who are embarking on studies of children’s environmental health.

show abstract

Comparable measures of cognitive function in human infants and laboratory animals to identify environmental health risks to children.

Cited by 19 publications

References 102 publications

Hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence evaluation of the neurodevelopmental effects of chlorpyrifos

Hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence evaluation of the neurodevelopmental effects of chlorpyrifos

Utility of animal models of Alzheimer's disease in food bioactive research

Lessons Learned for the National Children’s Study from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Centers for Children’s Environmental Health and Disease Prevention Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About