Use of epidemiologic data in Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments

Persad, Amanda S.; Cooper, Glinda S.

doi:10.1016/j.taap.2008.01.013

Cited by 23 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the NIOSH risk assessments listed in Table 1-1, nine (70%) quantitatively examined the dose-response relationship by statistical models using epidemiologic data. In contrast, epidemiologic data have been used in less than 10% of Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments conducted by the EPA [Persad and Cooper 2008].…”

Section: Dose-response Modeling With Epidemiologic Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Current intelligence bulletin 69: NIOSH practices in occupational risk assessment.

Daniels¹,

Gilbert²,

Kuppusamy³

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document is in the public domain and may be freely copied or reprinted. Disclaimer Mention of any company or product does not constitute endorsement by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In addition, citations to websites external to NIOSH do not constitute NIOSH endorsement of the sponsoring organizations or their programs or products. Furthermore, NIOSH is not responsible for the content of these websites. All web addresses referenced in this document were accessible as of the publication date.

show abstract

Section: Dose-response Modeling With Epidemiologic Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Current intelligence bulletin 69: NIOSH practices in occupational risk assessment.

Daniels¹,

Gilbert²,

Kuppusamy³

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The entire database of EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) health assessments was reviewed through June 2007 by Persad and Cooper [14]. They catalogued 44 assessments, out of a total of 545 assessments in the database, which had used human data to derive non-cancer or cancer risk estimates.…”

Section: Example 3 Skin Lesions and Skin Cancer From Inorganic Arsenicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The information available for performing human health risk assessment varies widely among chemicals, and may include studies performed using in vitro systems (including prokaryotes and lower eukaryotes), in vivo systems such as animal models, or various types of human data, including epidemiology studies of exposed populations. Data generated through epidemiology studies may potentially be used to inform any or all of the first three components of the risk assessment process (hazard identification, dose-response assessment, and exposure assessment) identified by the NRC [14][15][16][17]. In the development of human health risk assessments, data evaluating health effects of the chemical of concern in humans are generally preferred over information obtained using in vivo animal studies or in vitro studies, since human epidemiology studies directly assess health effects on the population of concern at exposure levels that are directly relevant to people.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the development of human health risk assessments, data evaluating health effects of the chemical of concern in humans are generally preferred over information obtained using in vivo animal studies or in vitro studies, since human epidemiology studies directly assess health effects on the population of concern at exposure levels that are directly relevant to people. Use of human data eliminates the need to address several types of uncertainties inherent in the use of animal data, including uncertainties regarding cross-species extrapolation and differences in exposure paradigms (potentially including the route, duration, and level of exposures) between typical animal studies and expected human exposures [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Benefits and Barriers to Using Epidemiology Data in Environmental Risk Assessment

Raffaele¹

2011

TOEPIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Uncertainty arises from study limitations regarding internal validity including exposure assessment, confounding and other potential sources of bias, and external validity or generalization from study populations to the populations for which risk assessments are conducted (Guzelian et al 2005; Hertz-Picciotto 1995; Lash et al 2009; Levy 2008; Maldonado 2008; Persad and Cooper 2008). Further, point estimates can be inaccurate because of internal validity issues and also because confidence intervals focus only on the potential for random error.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Uncertainty to Strengthen Epidemiologic Data for Use in Human Health Risk Assessments

Burns

Wright

Pierson

et al. 2014

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There is a recognized need to improve the application of epidemiologic data in human health risk assessment especially for understanding and characterizing risks from environmental and occupational exposures. Although there is uncertainty associated with the results of most epidemiologic studies, techniques exist to characterize uncertainty that can be applied to improve weight-of-evidence evaluations and risk characterization efforts.Methods: This report derives from a Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) workshop held in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, to discuss the utility of using epidemiologic data in risk assessments, including the use of advanced analytic methods to address sources of uncertainty. Epidemiologists, toxicologists, and risk assessors from academia, government, and industry convened to discuss uncertainty, exposure assessment, and application of analytic methods to address these challenges.Synthesis: Several recommendations emerged to help improve the utility of epidemiologic data in risk assessment. For example, improved characterization of uncertainty is needed to allow risk assessors to quantitatively assess potential sources of bias. Data are needed to facilitate this quantitative analysis, and interdisciplinary approaches will help ensure that sufficient information is collected for a thorough uncertainty evaluation. Advanced analytic methods and tools such as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) and Bayesian statistical techniques can provide important insights and support interpretation of epidemiologic data.Conclusions: The discussions and recommendations from this workshop demonstrate that there are practical steps that the scientific community can adopt to strengthen epidemiologic data for decision making.Citation: Burns CJ, Wright JM, Pierson JB, Bateson TF, Burstyn I, Goldstein DA, Klaunig JE, Luben TJ, Mihlan G, Ritter L, Schnatter AR, Symons JM, Yi KD. 2014. Evaluating uncertainty to strengthen epidemiologic data for use in human health risk assessments. Environ Health Perspect 122:1160–1165; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1308062

show abstract

Use of epidemiologic data in Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments

Cited by 23 publications

References 23 publications

Current intelligence bulletin 69: NIOSH practices in occupational risk assessment.

Current intelligence bulletin 69: NIOSH practices in occupational risk assessment.

Benefits and Barriers to Using Epidemiology Data in Environmental Risk Assessment

Evaluating Uncertainty to Strengthen Epidemiologic Data for Use in Human Health Risk Assessments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About