The 2016 Frank Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Lautenberg TSCA) amended the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to mandate protection of susceptible and highly exposed populations. Program implementation entails a myriad of choices that can lead to different degrees of public health protections. Well-documented exposures to multiple industrial chemicals occur from air, soil, water, food, and products in our workplaces, schools, and homes. Many hazardous chemicals are associated with or known to cause health risks; for other industrial chemicals, no data exist to confirm their safety because of flaws in 1976 TSCA. Under the 2016 Lautenberg amendments, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must evaluate chemicals against risk-based safety standards under enforceable deadlines, with an explicit mandate to identify and assess risks to susceptible and highly exposed populations. Effective public health protection requires EPA to implement the Lautenberg TSCA requirements by incorporating intrinsic and extrinsic factors that affect susceptibility, adequately assessing exposure among vulnerable groups, and accurately identifying highly exposed groups. We recommend key scientific and risk assessment principles to inform health-protective chemical policy such as consideration of aggregate exposures from all pathways and, when data are lacking, the use of health-protective defaults.

Purpose of review: The goal of this review is to identify cumulative modeling methods used to evaluate combined effects of exposures to environmental chemicals and social stressors. The specific review question is: What are the existing quantitative methods used to examine the cumulative impacts of exposures to environmental chemical and social stressors on health? Recent findings: There has been an increase in literature that evaluates combined effects of exposures to environmental chemicals and social stressors on health using regression models; very few studies applied other data mining and machine learning techniques to this problem. The majority of studies we identified used regression models to evaluate combined effects of multiple environmental and social stressors. With proper study design and appropriate modeling assumptions, additional data mining methods may be useful to examine combined effects of environmental and social stressors.

Background

Systematic reviews are increasingly prevalent in environmental health due to their ability to synthesize evidence while reducing bias. Different systematic review methods have been developed by the US National Toxicology Program's Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT), the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), and by the US EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), including the approach to assess risk of bias (ROB), one of the most vital steps which is used to evaluate internal validity of the studies. Our objective was to compare the performance of three tools (OHAT, IRIS, TSCA) in assessing ROB.

Methods

We selected a systematic review on polybrominated diphenyl ethers and intelligence quotient and/or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder because it had been endorsed by the National Academy of Sciences. Two reviewers followed verbatim instructions from the tools and independently applied each tool to assess ROB in 15 studies previously identified. We documented the time to apply each tool and the impact the ROB ratings for each tool had on the final rating of the quality of the overall body of evidence.

Results

The time to complete the ROB assessments varied widely (mean = 20, 32, and 40 min per study for the OHAT, IRIS, and TSCA tools, respectively). All studies were rated overall "low" or "uninformative" using IRIS, due to "deficient" or "critically deficient" ratings in one or two domains. Similarly, all studies were rated "unacceptable" using the TSCA tool because of one "unacceptable" rating in a metric related to statistical power. Approximately half of the studies had "low" or "probably low ROB" ratings across all domains with the OHAT and Navigation Guide tools.

Conclusions

Tools that use overall ROB or study quality ratings, such as IRIS and TSCA, may reduce the available evidence to assess the harms of environmental exposures by erroneously excluding studies, which leads to inaccurate conclusions about the quality of the body of evidence. We recommend using ROB tools that circumvents these issues, such as OHAT and Navigation Guide.

Systematic review registration

This review has not been registered as it is not a systematic review.

Introduction

Human cytochrome p450 (CYP) enzyme expression and activity is lower in the fetus as compared to the adult; however, limited quantitative data exists regarding the specific differences in magnitude or the degree of inducibility due to environmental factors.

Methods

We utilized a combination of in silico- and molecular-based approaches to profile and compare CYP expression/activity in human adult liver and fetal tissues. Using public datasets, we evaluated human CYP expression between: 1) placenta vs. adult livers; 2) fetal vs. adult livers; or 3) five compartments of the human placenta. We generated new experimental data, characterizing expression levels of nine CYPs in placenta/fetal liver vs. adult liver. In a subset of samples, we evaluated CYP3A4 activity. Finally, we summarized evidence of human fetal CYP expression/activity and environmental exposures during pregnancy.

Results

In silico, CYPs were predominately expressed at higher levels in the adult liver vs. fetal tissues, with a few noted exceptions. Sixty percent of CYP enzymes were expressed at nominal levels in the placenta. In wet-lab analyses, we observed significant CYP-specific differences in expression/activity between adult and fetal tissues; CYP2E1 and -3A4 were expressed significantly lower in fetal vs. adult livers, while CYP2J2 levels were similar.

Discussion

We provide a qualitative review of the expression of the CYP enzyme family in critical sites of xenobiotic distribution during human pregnancy and novel quantitative data regarding fetal CYP expression and activity during mid-gestation. Data outputs may be a resource for modeling predictions of chemical distribution and sensitivity.

Background

Synthesizing environmental health science is crucial to taking action to protect public health. Procedures for evidence evaluation and integration are transitioning from "expert-based narrative" to "systematic" review methods. However, little is known about the methodology being utilized for either type of review.

Objectives

To appraise the methodological strengths and weaknesses of a sample of "expert-based narrative" and "systematic" reviews in environmental health.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple databases and identified relevant reviews using pre-specified eligibility criteria. We applied a modified version of the Literature Review Appraisal Toolkit (LRAT) to three environmental health topics that assessed the utility, validity and transparency of reviews.

Results

We identified 29 reviews published between 2003 and 2019, of which 13 (45%) were self-identified as systematic reviews. Across every LRAT domain, systematic reviews received a higher percentage of "satisfactory" ratings compared to non-systematic reviews. In eight of these domains, there was a statistically significant difference observed between the two types of reviews and "satisfactory" ratings. Non-systematic reviews performed poorly with the majority receiving an "unsatisfactory" or "unclear" rating in 11 of the 12 domains. Systematic reviews performed poorly in six of the 12 domains; 10 (77%) did not state the reviews objectives or develop a protocol; eight (62%) did not state the roles and contribution of the authors, or evaluate the internal validity of the included evidence consistently using a valid method; and only seven (54%) stated a pre-defined definition of the evidence bar on which their conclusions were based, or had an author disclosure of interest statement.

Discussion

Systematic reviews produced more useful, valid, and transparent conclusions compared to non-systematic reviews, but poorly conducted systematic reviews were prevalent. Ongoing development and implementation of empirically based systematic review methods are required in environmental health to ensure transparent and timely decision making to protect the public's health.

In the original publication of this article [1], the new reference citation has been included in the body text repeatedly and not added as an endnote.

The 2016 Frank Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Lautenberg TSCA) amended the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to mandate protection of susceptible and highly exposed populations. Program implementation entails a myriad of choices that can lead to different degrees of public health protections. Well-documented exposures to multiple industrial chemicals occur from air, soil, water, food, and products in our workplaces, schools, and homes. Many hazardous chemicals are associated with or known to cause health risks; for other industrial chemicals, no data exist to confirm their safety because of flaws in 1976 TSCA. Under the 2016 Lautenberg amendments, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must evaluate chemicals against risk-based safety standards under enforceable deadlines, with an explicit mandate to identify and assess risks to susceptible and highly exposed populations. Effective public health protection requires EPA to implement the Lautenberg TSCA requirements by incorporating intrinsic and extrinsic factors that affect susceptibility, adequately assessing exposure among vulnerable groups, and accurately identifying highly exposed groups. We recommend key scientific and risk assessment principles to inform health-protective chemical policy such as consideration of aggregate exposures from all pathways and, when data are lacking, the use of health-protective defaults.