What Additional Factors Beyond State-of-the-Art Analytical Methods Are Needed for Optimal Generation and Interpretation of Biomonitoring Data?

Division of Laboratory Sciences, National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Environmental Health Perspectives (Impact Factor: 7.03). 10/2009; 117(10):1481-5. DOI: 10.1289/ehp.0901108
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The routine use of biomonitoring (i.e., measurement of environmental chemicals, their metabolites, or specific reaction products in human biological specimens) to assess internal exposure (i.e., body burden) has gained importance in exposure assessment.
Selection and validation of biomarkers of exposure are critical factors in interpreting biomonitoring data. Moreover, the strong relation between quality of the analytical methods used for biomonitoring and quality of the resulting data is well understood. However, the relevance of collecting, storing, processing, and transporting the samples to the laboratory to the overall biomonitoring process has received limited attention, especially for organic chemicals.
We present examples to illustrate potential sources of unintended contamination of the biological specimen during collection or processing procedures. The examples also highlight the importance of ensuring that the biological specimen analyzed both represents the sample collected for biomonitoring purposes and reflects the exposure of interest.
Besides using high-quality analytical methods and good laboratory practices for biomonitoring, evaluation of the collection and handling of biological samples should be emphasized, because these procedures can affect the samples integrity and representativeness. Biomonitoring programs would be strengthened with the inclusion of field blanks.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Results of recent national surveys have shown the high prevalence of exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) and triclosan (TCS) among the general population; however biomonitoring data for pregnant women and infants are limited. Women (n=80) were recruited from early prenatal clinics and asked to collect urine samples multiple times during pregnancy and once 2-3months post-partum. Samples of infant urine and meconium as well as breast milk and infant formula were also collected. Biospecimens were analyzed by GC-MS/MS for BPA, TCS and triclocarban (TCC). Triclosan was detected in over 80% of the maternal urines (geometric mean (GM): 21.61μg/L), 60% of the infant urines (GM: 2.8μg/L), 46% of the breast milk and 80% of the meconium samples. Triclocarban was rarely detected in any of the biospecimens. Median total BPA concentrations were 1.21 and 0.24μg/L in maternal and infant urines, respectively. Free BPA was detected in only 11% of infant urine samples. The meconium of female infants had significantly higher concentrations of total BPA and TCS than those of males, while no differences were observed in infant urine concentrations by sex. We found widespread exposure among pregnant women and infants to environmental phenols, with large inter-individual variability in exposure to triclosan. These data will contribute to the risk assessment of these chemicals, especially in susceptible sub-populations. Crown Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
    Science of The Total Environment 12/2014; 508. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.10.107 · 3.16 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The quality of exposure assessment is a major determinant of the overall quality of any environmental epidemiology study. The use of biomonitoring as a tool for assessing exposure to ubiquitous chemicals with short physiologic half-lives began relatively recently. These chemicals present several challenges, including their presence in analytical laboratories and sampling equipment, difficulty in establishing temporal order in cross-sectional studies, short- and long-term variability in exposures and biomarker concentrations, and a paucity of information on the number of measurements required for proper exposure classification. To date, the scientific community has not developed a set of systematic guidelines for designing, implementing and interpreting studies of short-lived chemicals that use biomonitoring as the exposure metric or for evaluating the quality of this type of research for WOE assessments or for peer review of grants or publications. We describe key issues that affect epidemiology studies using biomonitoring data on short-lived chemicals and propose a systematic instrument - the Biomonitoring, Environmental Epidemiology, and Short-lived Chemicals (BEES-C) instrument - for evaluating the quality of research proposals and studies that incorporate biomonitoring data on short-lived chemicals. Quality criteria for three areas considered fundamental to the evaluation of epidemiology studies that include biological measurements of short-lived chemicals are described: 1) biomarker selection and measurement, 2) study design and execution, and 3) general epidemiological study design considerations. We recognize that the development of an evaluative tool such as BEES-C is neither simple nor non-controversial. We hope and anticipate that the instrument will initiate further discussion/debate on this topic.
    Environment International 12/2014; 73:195–207. DOI:10.1016/j.envint.2014.07.011 · 5.66 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is extensive evidence that bisphenol A (BPA) is related to a wide range of adverse health effects based on both human and experimental animal studies. However, a number of regulatory agencies have ignored all hazard findings. Reports of high levels of unconjugated (bioactive) serum BPA in dozens of human biomonitoring studies have also been rejected based on the prediction that the findings are due to assay contamination and that virtually all ingested BPA is rapidly converted to inactive metabolites. NIH and industry-sponsored round robin studies have demonstrated that serum BPA can be accurately assayed without contamination, while the FDA lab has acknowledged uncontrolled assay contamination. In reviewing the published BPA biomonitoring data, we find that assay contamination is, in fact, well controlled in most labs, and cannot be used as the basis for discounting evidence that significant and virtually continuous exposure to BPA must be occurring from multiple sources.
    Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 10/2014; 398(1-2). DOI:10.1016/j.mce.2014.09.028 · 4.24 Impact Factor

Preview (2 Sources)

Available from